On 2004-01-15, 15:21:07 (-0800), Jackson, Jeff wrote:
> Yes, that seems to be the case. I haven't reverted back to 1.61, yet,
> anyway. So far, no one in my company has complained about any missing
> images, so I'll probably wait for a different solution (read: wait for next
> anomy update).
.. and just to verify that I'm alive and not ignoring y'all, this is
on my list of things which I need to re-evaluate (defanging based on
treating content-IDs as file-names).
Not sure exactly when/how, but I'm aware of the problem and agree it
needs to be addressed.
-- Bjarni Rúnar Einarsson firstname.lastname@example.org http://bre.klaki.net/
PGP: 02764305, B7A3AB89