[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters
From: |
David Levine |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters |
Date: |
Fri, 07 Oct 2016 09:19:20 -0400 |
Lyndon wrote:
> > On Oct 6, 2016, at 8:11 PM, David Levine <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > But I wouldn't consider the likely result with filename=/foo/bar/README
> > to be safest.
>
> Why not? If there is no "README" file, create it. If there is, prompt for a
> replacement if stdin is a tty, else synthesize a unique replacement name and
> be done with it.
It wouldn't be safest because I would risk overwriting README in the
current directory. That's not what I expect.
In any case, I don't think that we should change the mhstore
defaults because that might break scripts as well as user
expecations. Those include the default of -noauto. You can
override those defaults in your profile (I do) to get pretty close
to what you ask for. Though there isn't a basename, it should be
possible to support that with formatting strings that pipe the content
to a script that runs basename(1) on %a.
To get back to the question about RFC 2047 encoded name parameters,
I'll just add a note to the mhstore man page for users to use mhfixmsg
to get around that.
David
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Ralph Corderoy, 2016/10/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Earl Hood, 2016/10/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, David Levine, 2016/10/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2016/10/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2016/10/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, David Levine, 2016/10/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2016/10/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters,
David Levine <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Ralph Corderoy, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Ken Hornstein, 2016/10/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Ken Hornstein, 2016/10/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Paul Vixie, 2016/10/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 vs RFC 2231 encoding for MIME parameters, Paul Vixie, 2016/10/03