The most recent patch looks pretty good from your description.
c) Replaces %display% with 127.0.0.1:<display>.0 in commands
Huh, I was going to say that %display% should be replaced with "127.0.0.1:0.0", but then I remembered that we know the "0.0", but we don't know that the user connected via "127.0.0.1". However, should we just choose to replace display with "127.0.0.1:d.s" where d is display and s is screen? I know that some users report better performance when using their actual ip instead of lookback for DISPLAY...
Ugh... what should we do here? Leave it as you did it?
Harold
