Oliver wrote: > > > These are definitely just wrong -- we shouldn't be specifying > > > name and x-unix-mode for the body text > > Yes, that's badly wrong. I've never used -attach, one of the reasons being > that I didn't like it including x-unix-mode. Another thing that bothered > me was that I couldn't get it to apply the attachments but defer sending > so that I could run list to see the results.
I quickly got used to that. alist lists the attachments. list shows them, ordered, in the headers. > > Adding -attachformat 1 to the send entry of your .mh_profile > > will get rid of the name and x-unix-mode. That option can > > The name is useful for actual attachments although we should really be > using Content-Disposition for that. We do, almost, with -attachformat 1. We include filename in the Content-Disposition of an attachment. We also include name in the Content-Type. That seems to be common (mis-)usage. And see below about mhstore using the Content-Type name. Here's an example with a plain text attachment, using -attachformat 1: ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" This is the body of my message; ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0 Content-Type: text/plain; name="attachment.txt"; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="attachment.txt" Here are the contents of my text attachment. ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0-- > For the body, I can't understand why anyone would want either name > or x-unix-mode. mhstore ignores Content-Disposition. If there's no name in Content-Type, it generates a name based on the message number. David ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers