Comment # 1 on bug 72263 from Patrick Ohly

(In reply to comment #0)
> Please notice the change at line 170 in signon.cpp: without that, I couldn't
> get the code to build. Let me know if that is fine, or if I should remove
> that chunk or if you prefer to have it submitted as a separate patch.

I'll submit it separately. It'll potentially pass NULL for the %s which printf
tends to catch, I usually just don't want to rely on that.

What kind of compiler error did you get with the old code?

The rest of the patch looks good, thanks.