Looking more closely I think that we are breaking ares_timeout(), it
has to return a time difference or timeout value to next timeout, not
the time of the next timeout per se. Otherwise we would break ABI.
I think that the changes introduced in ares_timeout.c in current CVS
line numbering from line 66 to line 76 should be simply undone.
-- -=[Yang]=-Received on 2008-05-15