Pawel Salek wrote: > On 01/01/2009 11:36:33 AM, Ildar Mulyukov wrote: >> See attached message. It's subject shown as >> [Bug >> 18260]=?UTF-8?Q?=20=D0=BD=D0=B5=D1=82=20=D0=B7=D0=B0=D0=B2=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B8=D0=BC=D0=BE=D1=81=D1=82=D0=B8=20=D0=BD=D0=B0=20libstrongswan?= >> >> >> Balsa with gmime-2.0 and mutt shows allright. >> Codebase: >> http://git.altlinux.org/people/ildar/packages/?p=balsa.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/patches/gmime-2.4 >> >> >> Anyone to help? > > So, the question is whether the following string is a properly encoded > or not: > > 0]=?UTF-8?Q?=20=D0=BD=D0=B5=20libstrongswan?= > > According to rfc2822, value of Subject header is supposed to be an > unstructured text but I do not see directly how this connects to > encoded words of RFC2047... Anybody? > > Pawel > Technically, that encoding is broken but I thought I had added logic to GMime to try and work around issues like that. In GMime 2.2.x, this workaround was enabled via a compile-time configure switch, but in 2.4.x it is enabled via a runtime flag to g_mime_init() called GMIME_ENABLE_RFC2047_WORKAROUNDS.
I changed this for 2 reasons: 1. so that different software can decide on using a different option using the same installed version of gmime 2. (and more importantly) it makes it easier for me to unit test both cases :) Jeff _______________________________________________ balsa-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/balsa-list
