On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > Hi Lee > > > > > > I posted a new version. > > > > > > Your email indicates you are using Mutt: > > > > > > >User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) > > > > > > Which is also what i use. I've never had issues with signatures like > > > this. I also cannot find any documentation as to how you configure > > > mutt remove signatures. How are you doing it? > > > > I think it's automatic. I certainly didn't set that up. > > Interesting. My mutt installation does not do this. I trim emails > manually to be netiquette compliant. > > > Try replying to your own mail. I should automatically cut. > > Replying to my patch works fine. It does not cut the patch. > > This is a bug somewhere, since the marker i used is not a signature > marker. It did not have the space on the end.
Yes, you're correct, it should be "-- \n". Give me a sec ... Ah, it's an Emacs Post-Mode thing: ;;; Revision 1.6.0 1999/03/04 18:04 Rob Reid ;;; Returned post-signature-pattern to using "--" instead of "-- " ;;; because some senders have broken MTAs (as Eric reminded me) and ;;; some users don't use procmail to compensate. This time all of the ;;; functions dealing with signatures have been smartened up to avoid ;;; false matches. Unfortunately that means they don't use ;;; post-signature-pattern in its raw form. > Anyway, getting the patch reviewed is more important to me than > tracing down the bug... Agreed. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
