Anand Buddhdev writes: > My question to Sam then is: Why does courier choose to rewrite the headers > in the body of the message? They are in the correct format, and all courier > is doing is re-arranging their order, thereby making the message > unverifiable. Why can't courier leave those headers as they are, since they > don't _need_ rewriting. Isn't that a reasonable argument? Without looking at the entire message I can't say. Possible reasons that can trigger rewriting are: * Unspecified content-type charset. Courier will provide one. * Unspecified transfer encoding. Courier will calculate the best encoding and use that. -- Sam
- Re: problem using quoted printable encoding with gp... Anand Buddhdev
- Re: problem using quoted printable encoding wi... David Ellement
- Re: problem using quoted printable encodin... Anand Buddhdev
- Re: problem using quoted printable enc... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: problem using quoted printable encoding wi... Thomas Roessler
- Re: problem using quoted printable encodin... Thomas Roessler
- Re: problem using quoted printable enc... Thomas Roessler
- Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Thomas Roessler
- Re: Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Nils Vogels
- Re: Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Anand Buddhdev
- Re: Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Sam Varshavchik
- Re: Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Anand Buddhdev
- Re: Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Lars Hecking
- Re: Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Sam Varshavchik
- Re: Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Thomas Roessler
- Re: Summary: courier-mta BROKEN. Thomas Roessler