|
|
Posted by Perseus on 10/14/05 21:30
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 21:23:52 +0100, "Paul Blay"
<ask_me_or_get_spam_trapped@saotome.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>"Perseus" <ComHost-h0001.erase@hccnet.nl> wrote ...
>> You say that neither solution works well with the other, but the ".dll"
>> fix operates regardless of whatever is present in the "hosts" file !
>> It's of course true that when the ".dll" fix has been applied, the
>> "hosts" file solution becomes useless.
>
>If the hosts file has no effect when the .dll fix is in place then the
>.dll fix can hardly be said to be working well _with_ the other, it's
>just working well _despite_ the other.
>
>> Oh and you may want to do your math over again, as 50 + 50 + 50 still
>> equals 150... ;D
>
>You may want to brush up on usenet headers.
Paul,
Like I said, the ".dll" fix operates regardless of whatever is present
in the "hosts" file, thus there's no conflict, thus the ".dll" fix
operates just fine ! It's only the other way around that there's a
problem. But please let's not go into semantics here, ok?
"brush up on usenet headers"? Please explain.
Greetz,
--
Perseus
E-mail: leave out ".erase" <- mind the dot!
**
Idealism is what precedes experience; cynicism is what follows.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|