David T-G wrote: > > ... that's my understanding as well. $p_c_t will only work if you have > no attachments and use us-ascii characters, or at least that's the way > it's been through 1.3.x so far.
yup - for attachments you'd need to use s/mime or PGP/MIME. traditionally signed messages are useful in their own ways though - they're neater in mailing list archives, can be checked later more easily (since you can just copy the text into a text file and verify it), and are more widely readable. personally, i like having the option to do both. mutt 1.5.0 (cvs version) does attempt to allow use of non us-ascii characters (using utf encoding as i understand it), but i've had inconsistent results so far. the cvs version also adds an 'x-mutt-action' or something of the sort to the content type, so that other people using mutt (well people using a version of mutt that supports this, at least) won't have to do anything special to verify the message. -- Will Yardley input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . >
