S�ren Kuklau wrote: > Yup, that one was good. 2002-01-05-11 though isn't that good - crash on > preferences opening. >
I had this same problem with 2002010508 (and can't find 11 for Win32). I went back to 2002010403 with good results.
S�ren Kuklau wrote: > Yup, that one was good. 2002-01-05-11 though isn't that good - crash on > preferences opening. >
I had this same problem with 2002010508 (and can't find 11 for Win32). I went back to 2002010403 with good results.