[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] Understanding nmh (aka. What's the goal) [ reallynon-A

From: Oliver Kiddle
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Understanding nmh (aka. What's the goal) [ reallynon-ASCII message bodies ]
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 15:06:55 +0100

David Levine wrote:
> > These are definitely just wrong -- we shouldn't be specifying
> > name and x-unix-mode for the body text

Yes, that's badly wrong. I've never used -attach, one of the reasons being
that I didn't like it including x-unix-mode. Another thing that bothered
me was that I couldn't get it to apply the attachments but defer sending
so that I could run list to see the results. But I must admit that I
like the idea of not having to remember to type mime when my e-mail
contains attachments, or the odd umlaut or pound sign.

> Adding -attachformat 1 to the send entry of your .mh_profile
> will get rid of the name and x-unix-mode.  That option can

The name is useful for actual attachments although we should really be
using Content-Disposition for that. For the body, I can't understand
why anyone would want either name or x-unix-mode.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]