http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4068
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-13 05:55 ------- Subject: Re: should use consistent CRLF/LF line endings On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 03:51:11AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > So don't fall into the overengineering trap, like trying to guess which line > ending to use. ALWAYS use CRLF, and nothing else, ever. > > If spamc/spamd do not grok CRLF, they are broken. They read in CRLF, they just don't print out CRLF currently. Since SpamAssassin isn't designed to run at the MTA level, there's no specification about what the line endings ought to be, so we've used "\n" as is standard in most perl apps I've seen. I think that SA ought to "do the right thing" and figure out "\n" vs "\r\n" -- just switching from one to the other will likely break a bunch of apps that just expect "\n"... For now (and since SA began), if you're hooking into the MTA via some third party application, it's up to *that application* to know to deal with the conversion. This is the "enhancement request" version of this issue. For Windows/other CRLF-EOL platforms, SA doesn't put out the correct line endings for the platform, which is the "bug" version of this issue. It just so happens that the solution to both is the same. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
