André Malo wrote: > * Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Though since it really affects any logging it probably should be called >>UNESCAPED_LOGGING or similar. And probably a similar patch applied to 1.3. > > > It only affects error logging.
that was my intent. > What do you mean by any logging? > > I can live with it in general (wouldn't make the scratch definition twice). sorry, that was me trying to make it compile under -Werror with my only passable C skills :) > However, is it wise to add a configure option for it? how do you mean? I was trying to make it just a compile time option, similar to -DBIG_SECURITY_HOLE (which seems to me a bigger risk than this). do you mean to require users to change a define in the code itself? --Geoff
