On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Peter Rival wrote:
>
> And if pine screws up this attachment, I'm gonna...something...
Not screwed up, but it's BASE64-encoded. Which means that I can't just
apply the email, I have to separately save the attachment etc, and I can't
reply to the email and have my mail client include the quoted attachment
in the reply (needed if I need to point some problem with the patch etc).
This is why I absolutely abhor attachments - they add zero value (over a
well-behaving mail app), and they make some things basically impossible to
do conveniently.
I've applied the patch, but please try to get a fixed mail client. A
normal "read file" in pine will do it with almost all versions of pine
(some versions are broken and will strip whitespace from the end of lines,
stupid).
Alternatively, if you use attachments, if the mailer doesn't re-code them
as something stupid (ie leaves the encoding as plain ascii), then that
works too.
Linus
Hi,
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> This is why I absolutely abhor attachments - they add zero value (over a
> well-behaving mail app), and they make some things basically impossible to
> do conveniently.
I'd say they add value -- try sending binaries inline, and watch them beat
you up...
> Alternatively, if you use attachments, if the mailer doesn't re-code them
> as something stupid (ie leaves the encoding as plain ascii), then that
> works too.
Suggestion: since you use the shell to create patches, do the following:
receive mail, respond to mail, write text mails -> pine
send patches -> script (I have got an example here.)
Will work fine, and not corrupt your stuff unless you tell it to.
Thunder
--
assert(typeof((fool)->next) == typeof(fool)); /* wrong */