@Josh : Marking Bug #918815 (as well as Bug #915906) as a duplicate of this bug would be inconsistent with what Bryce wrote in message #37 here above. In any case the description of both bugs explicitly refer to this bug and makes them this way dependent on it. Is this OK or do you want something more explicit?
@Josh : Marking Bug #918815 (as well as Bug #915906) as a duplicate of this bug would be inconsistent with what Bryce wrote in message #37 here above. In any case the description of both bugs explicitly refer to this bug and makes them this way dependent on it. Is this OK or do you want something more explicit?