attachment encoding

[Rick Lecoat]

Hi there;

I just tried to send a self extracting stuffit archive for windows, and
figured that since it was effectively a windows file (it has an .exe
suffix) and was going to a windows user I should use Base64 encoding. PM
threw up a warning saying that it had reverted the encoding choice to
Smart because Base 64 would corrupt the file. I appreciate the warning
from PM but an confused by it; AFAIK windows files (even applications
like this self extracting archive) don't have resource forks so why would
Base64 be unsuitable?

I've not sent the file yet, I thought I'd see if I could get a quick
response from the list to set my mind at ease before I send it on its way.

Cheers as always;
Rick

---
G4/500 MHz (DP)  ::  OS X 10.2.6  ::  768 MB RAM
PM 4.1.3  ::  3 pane mode

Attachment encoding

[computer artwork by subhash]

Again I'm asking how PM uses the "Smart encoding" function for
attachments. I sent a PDF with smart encoding to a windows user who
couldn't "open" it (no precise description given). With the same Mail I
sent a copy to an Apple user who could open it and forwarded it to this
windows user per Mail.app. So he also could open it.

What was wrong?

-- 
http://www.subhash.at

Force Attachment Encoding

[Christian Roth]

Hi,

using PM 4.2b1, how can I force PM to send an attachment using, say
Base64 encoding? PM keeps telling me that the attachment will be
corrupted when sent with the specified encoding and that it will use
"Smart" instead. Sure enough, the file probably has a resource fork, but
I know for sure that the receiver will only read the data fork and losing
the resource is what I want.

I think previous versions would let me send the attachment in Base64
anyway, discarding the resource fork, if needed.

How can I make PM 4.2b1 use the encoding I deliberately set manually? I
tried all the modifier keys, but PM always resets to "Smart"...

Regards, Christian.

Re: attachment encoding

[Andy Fragen]

*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003, Ben Kennedy said:

>On 16 6 2003 at 11:27 pm -0400, Andy Fragen wrote:
>
>>Try this one.
>>
>>
>
>Okay, this is really bizarre... I just tried Vince, from the same vendor
>and the same web site, yesterday upon recommendation.  This one not only
>has more functionality (i.e. can add and delete), but also works more
>sensibly (as a pref pane).  Thanks!

That's why I like it better. You're welcome.

-- 
Andy Fragen
TiBook 400/384 RAM - OS X 10.2.6 - PowerMail v4.1.3
PowerMail AppleScript Archives: http://homepage.mac.com/wayneb/powermail.html

Re: attachment encoding

[C. A. Niemiec]

>Okay, this is really bizarre... I just tried Vince, from the same vendor
>and the same web site, yesterday upon recommendation.  This one not only
>has more functionality (i.e. can add and delete), but also works more
>sensibly (as a pref pane).  Thanks!

Even more bizzare, on checking the other recommendation I found I had
installed MoreInternet a while ago but obviously didn't need to make a
lot of changes and forgot about it. Maybe it was the icon that stuck in
my mind. - Duh! :)

Chris
-- 

Re: attachment encoding

[Ben Kennedy]

On 16 6 2003 at 11:27 pm -0400, Andy Fragen wrote:

>Try this one.
>
>

Okay, this is really bizarre... I just tried Vince, from the same vendor
and the same web site, yesterday upon recommendation.  This one not only
has more functionality (i.e. can add and delete), but also works more
sensibly (as a pref pane).  Thanks!

-ben

-- 
Ben Kennedy, chief magician
zygoat creative technical services
613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628
http://www.zygoat.ca

Re: attachment encoding

[Andy Fragen]

*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003, Ben Kennedy said:

>>On Mac OS X, InternetConfig settings are editable from the
>>Internet Explorer's File Helpers preference. Make sure the "Macintosh
>>file" checkbox is not checked for the file type you want to send.
>
>Now that Internet Explorer is end-of-lifed, and nobody* uses it anyway
>since Safari is far superior, are we going to have to keep a copy of it
>around just to edit these file associations?

Try this one.



-- 
Andy Fragen
TiBook 400/384 RAM - OS X 10.2.6 - PowerMail v4.1.3
PowerMail AppleScript Archives: http://homepage.mac.com/wayneb/powermail.html

Re: attachment encoding

[C. A. Niemiec]

>However, it doesn't let me remove a bunch of the junk in there (for
>example, piles of file encodings like stuffit: and x-cpt: and binhex: and
>so on, which aren't URI schemes at all!).
>
>Furthermore, it had IE specified as the ftp handler.  I've changed it to
>Transmit.  Nonetheless, Safari insists on opening all ftp:// URLs using
>the Finder -- which drives me completely mad because it's slow, buggy,
>and there is no visual clue about what's going on.  How can I fix that? 
>Is that a safari problem?

It's a 1.0 release, therefore room for improvement exactly as you've
found. I tried changing my ftp setting via Vince to Transmit, but with
differing results: ftp directories (ending in "/") will be passed to
Transmit to browse, but ftp files (i.e. ends in ".tar.gz", etc.) Safari
takes for itself. Hmmm. Just a quick test.

(I had a situation once where I wanted all links beginning in "http://";
and ending in ".sit" to be passed on to an FTP program because the
browsers at the time didn't reliably resume interrupted downloads. But
they're better now and I'm not on a dial up connection, so a failed
download is not such a frustration. But it wasn't fixable via Internet
Config anyhow.)

Chris
-- 

Re: attachment encoding

[Ben Kennedy]

On 16 6 2003 at 1:01 pm -0400, C. A. Niemiec wrote:

>>>On Mac OS X, InternetConfig settings are editable from the
>>>Internet Explorer's File Helpers preference. Make sure the "Macintosh
>>>file" checkbox is not checked for the file type you want to send.
>>
>>Now that Internet Explorer is end-of-lifed, and nobody* uses it anyway
>>since Safari is far superior, are we going to have to keep a copy of it
>>around just to edit these file associations?
>
>Specifically to address this in OS X, try Vince:
>

Thanks Chris, that's a start.  At least it lets me divert http and https
to Safari from IE.

However, it doesn't let me remove a bunch of the junk in there (for
example, piles of file encodings like stuffit: and x-cpt: and binhex: and
so on, which aren't URI schemes at all!).

Furthermore, it had IE specified as the ftp handler.  I've changed it to
Transmit.  Nonetheless, Safari insists on opening all ftp:// URLs using
the Finder -- which drives me completely mad because it's slow, buggy,
and there is no visual clue about what's going on.  How can I fix that? 
Is that a safari problem?

-ben

-- 
Ben Kennedy, chief magician
zygoat creative technical services
613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628
http://www.zygoat.ca

Re: attachment encoding

[C. A. Niemiec]

>>On Mac OS X, InternetConfig settings are editable from the
>>Internet Explorer's File Helpers preference. Make sure the "Macintosh
>>file" checkbox is not checked for the file type you want to send.
>
>Now that Internet Explorer is end-of-lifed, and nobody* uses it anyway
>since Safari is far superior, are we going to have to keep a copy of it
>around just to edit these file associations?

Specifically to address this in OS X, try Vince:


Chris
-- 

Re: attachment encoding

[Wayne Brissette]

Ben Kennedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Monday, June 16, 2003 stated:

>The second (ICScriptor) ostensibly does nothing as far as I can tell
>(besides giving an option to Open URL, and to Open Internet Config --
>which does nothing), and runs under Classic.

I know Quinn, so I'll ask him about it. 

Wayne

-- 
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." 
- Napoleon Bonaparte

Live DAT & Music Page: http://homepage.mac.com/wayneb/
Wayne's Music Calendar: http://ical.mac.com/wayneb/Music
PowerMail AppleScript Archives: http://homepage.mac.com/wayneb/powermail.html

Music Currently playing: Rusty Wier "Don't It Make You Wanna Dance?" :
Under My Hat

Re: attachment encoding

[Ben Kennedy]

On 16 6 2003 at 12:21 pm -0400, Marlyse Comte wrote:

>don't forget - it will only die on the mac,

Actually, after 6.1 it's done on windows as well.  

>and many will keep IE5 around for quite a while.

Well, true.  But having to use an obsolete app from a different vendor
for a different purpose is about as sensible and user-friendly as having
to boot into OS 9 and use ResEdit to add alert sounds.

-ben

-- 
Ben Kennedy, chief magician
zygoat creative technical services
613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628
http://www.zygoat.ca

Re: attachment encoding

[Ben Kennedy]

On 16 6 2003 at 12:02 pm -0400, Wayne Brissette wrote:

>While I haven't tried it, this may be the answer:
>
>

Oooh, a FAQ entry updated only seven and a half years ago! ;)

The first one (Internet Config Access) is on a bad URL (no such address).

The second (ICScriptor) ostensibly does nothing as far as I can tell
(besides giving an option to Open URL, and to Open Internet Config --
which does nothing), and runs under Classic.

-ben

-- 
Ben Kennedy, chief magician
zygoat creative technical services
613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628
http://www.zygoat.ca

Re: attachment encoding

[Marlyse Comte]

don't forget - it will only die on the mac, and many will keep IE5 around
for quite a while.

---marlyse

-former message(s) quotes:-

>>On Mac OS X, InternetConfig settings are editable from the
>>Internet Explorer's File Helpers preference. Make sure the "Macintosh
>>file" checkbox is not checked for the file type you want to send.
>
>Now that Internet Explorer is end-of-lifed, and nobody* uses it anyway
>since Safari is far superior, are we going to have to keep a copy of it
>around just to edit these file associations?

Re: attachment encoding

[Wayne Brissette]

Ben Kennedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Monday, June 16, 2003 stated:

>Now that Internet Explorer is end-of-lifed, and nobody* uses it anyway
>since Safari is far superior, are we going to have to keep a copy of it
>around just to edit these file associations?
>
>-ben

While I haven't tried it, this may be the answer:



Wayne

-- 
"Success usually comes to those who are too busy to be looking for it" 
- Henry David Thoreau

Live DAT & Music Page: http://homepage.mac.com/wayneb/
Wayne's Music Calendar: http://ical.mac.com/wayneb/Music
PowerMail AppleScript Archives: http://homepage.mac.com/wayneb/powermail.html

Music Currently playing: Big Country "Steeltown" : Live At Wolverhampton
Civic Hall

Re: attachment encoding

[Ben Kennedy]

On 16 6 2003 at 5:08 am -0400, PowerMail Engineering wrote:

>On Mac OS X, InternetConfig settings are editable from the
>Internet Explorer's File Helpers preference. Make sure the "Macintosh
>file" checkbox is not checked for the file type you want to send.

Now that Internet Explorer is end-of-lifed, and nobody* uses it anyway
since Safari is far superior, are we going to have to keep a copy of it
around just to edit these file associations?

-ben

*well, me anyway :)

-- 
Ben Kennedy, chief magician
zygoat creative technical services
613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628
http://www.zygoat.ca

Re: attachment encoding

[PowerMail Engineering]

Rick Lecoat wrote:

>I just tried to send a self extracting stuffit archive for windows, and
>figured that since it was effectively a windows file (it has an .exe
>suffix) and was going to a windows user I should use Base64 encoding. PM
>threw up a warning saying that it had reverted the encoding choice to
>Smart because Base 64 would corrupt the file.

PowerMail uses the InternetConfig settings to determine if a file is
encodable in base64 or not (ie, if the resource fork contains vital
informations). On Mac OS X, InternetConfig settings are editable from the
Internet Explorer's File Helpers preference. Make sure the "Macintosh
file" checkbox is not checked for the file type you want to send.

Jérôme - PowerMail Engineering

-
   "I've purchased PowerMail and I have to say that it is the best email
client I've seen. Not as saturated as OE, not as lite as Mailsmith,
not as cluttered as Eudora."
  PowerMail user comment on www.versiontracker.com

 Download a demo version from http://www.ctmdev.com
-

Re: attachment encoding

[Marlyse Comte]

uhm... i meant 'virus' not 'spam'.

---marlyse

>don't send just an .exe - many email programs might think this could be
>spam.

Re: attachment encoding

[Rick Lecoat]

Original message:
Received from Ben Kennedy on 13/6/03 at 4:40 pm

>Why not post the file to a web server?  Not only will that be more
>efficient on the infrastructure (assuming it's more than a meg or
>something in size), but avoid the virus issue.

That's a very good suggestion. I'm obviously rather slow today or I'd
have thought of it myself. Fridays
>
>Anyway, my suspicion is that your .exe does have a resource fork locally.
> Maybe it's a zero-byte fork, or maybe it contains some benign
>information related to the app that last used it (e.g. in the manner that
>BBEdit stores window positioning, etc. in the rsrc fork of text files).

yes that must be it I guess. Cheers.

Rick

---
G4/500 MHz (DP)  ::  OS X 10.2.6  ::  768 MB RAM
PM 4.1.3  ::  3 pane mode

Re: attachment encoding

[Ben Kennedy]

On 13 6 2003 at 9:44 am -0400, Rick Lecoat wrote:

>Well, I'm trying to avoid the recipient having to possess specific
>decompression software to open the files, hence the self extracting
>archive which, by necessity, is an application of sorts. But you're
>right, there's a good chance that their server will bounce it so maybe I
>should look at other options. Still, I'm curious to learn why Base64 is
>not suitable for .exe files, f anyone knows.

Why not post the file to a web server?  Not only will that be more
efficient on the infrastructure (assuming it's more than a meg or
something in size), but avoid the virus issue.

Anyway, my suspicion is that your .exe does have a resource fork locally.
 Maybe it's a zero-byte fork, or maybe it contains some benign
information related to the app that last used it (e.g. in the manner that
BBEdit stores window positioning, etc. in the rsrc fork of text files).

-ben

-- 
Ben Kennedy, chief magician
zygoat creative technical services
613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628
http://www.zygoat.ca

Re: attachment encoding

[Rick Lecoat]

Original message:
Received from Marlyse Comte on 13/6/03 at 2:29 pm

>don't send just an .exe - many email programs might think this could be
>spam. make a .zip out of it (drop zip) and then send it base64 - that
>should work.

Thanks Marlyse;

Well, I'm trying to avoid the recipient having to possess specific
decompression software to open the files, hence the self extracting
archive which, by necessity, is an application of sorts. But you're
right, there's a good chance that their server will bounce it so maybe I
should look at other options. Still, I'm curious to learn why Base64 is
not suitable for .exe files, f anyone knows.

Rick

---
G4/500 MHz (DP)  ::  OS X 10.2.6  ::  768 MB RAM
PM 4.1.3  ::  3 pane mode

Re: attachment encoding

[Mirko Kranenburg]

I agree about the not-exe:
I routinely send files to and from home (home=Mac, office in Win). Exe
files are not accepted by the system at all.
Zip is fine, but I never had any problems by leaving the smart-option on.

Mirko

> don't send just an .exe - many email programs might think this could be
> spam. make a .zip out of it (drop zip) and then send it base64 - that
> should work.
>
> ---marlyse
>
>
> -former message(s)
> quotes:-
>>I just tried to send a self extracting stuffit archive for windows, and
>>figured that since it was effectively a windows file (it has an .exe
>>suffix) and was going to a windows user I should use Base64 encoding. PM
>>threw up a warning saying that it had reverted the encoding choice to
>>Smart because Base 64 would corrupt the file. I appreciate the warning
>>from PM but an confused by it; AFAIK windows files (even applications
>>like this self extracting archive) don't have resource forks so why would
>>Base64 be unsuitable?
>
>
>
>

-- 
Mirko Kranenburg
Maastricht, Netherlands
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

OS X 10.2.6, QuickSilver 733, 1Gb RAM
Freeway Pro 3.5, NavPak, GraphPak
PowerMail 4.1.3, 3 panes

Re: attachment encoding

[Marlyse Comte]

don't send just an .exe - many email programs might think this could be
spam. make a .zip out of it (drop zip) and then send it base64 - that
should work.

---marlyse

-former message(s) quotes:-
>I just tried to send a self extracting stuffit archive for windows, and
>figured that since it was effectively a windows file (it has an .exe
>suffix) and was going to a windows user I should use Base64 encoding. PM
>threw up a warning saying that it had reverted the encoding choice to
>Smart because Base 64 would corrupt the file. I appreciate the warning
>from PM but an confused by it; AFAIK windows files (even applications
>like this self extracting archive) don't have resource forks so why would
>Base64 be unsuitable?

Re: Attachment encoding

[Anthony Sanna]

>you can edit InternetConfig settings in the preferences of
>InternetExplorer

I looked, but couldn't find anything resembling Internet Config in IE pref's.

Tony
-- 
Anthony R. Sanna
SACO Foods, Inc.
6120 University Avenue
Middleton, WI  53562

1-800-373-7226
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Attachment encoding

[PowerMail Engineering]

computer artwork by subhash wrote:

>Thanks for your answer BUT I don't understand. I thought Mail.app uses
>Apple double encoding. Then why could the windows user read the PDF sent
>with Mail.app and not with PM? Your answer suggests that he could read
>the PDF anyway encoded in Apple double or in base64. Or have I understood
>it completely wrong?

Windows users should receive attachments sent in AppleDouble, but they
will get an extra file that contains the resource fork and metadata. So
if the recipient complains that there is a file that he can't open,
that's normal, but the PDF file itself should be OK.
However, if he is using a webmail, maybe the webmail does not handle
AppleDouble correctly, although it is a valid MIME encoding... Maybe you
can ask him what mail client does he use, and does he get exactly?

Jérôme - PowerMail Engineering

-
   "Avec PowerMail, on n'éblouit pas l'utilisateur avec des icônes et des
fioritures partout, on fait dans l'efficace. Et là où les auteurs de ce
logiciel font très fort, c'est que malgré cette politique d'interface,
le logiciel reste agréable et totalement intégré au style Aqua. Beau et
pratique, il fallait le faire !"
  PowerMail revue on www.cuk.ch

 Download a demo version from www.ctmdev.com
-

Re: Attachment encoding

[PowerMail Engineering]

computer artwork by subhash wrote:

>Again I'm asking how PM uses the "Smart encoding" function for
>attachments.

If the attachment is known to be a mac format, it is sent in AppleDouble,
which means that a windows user will receive 2 files: one with the data
fork (which can be opened, in case of a PDF or any other standard
format), and one with the resource fork and metadata (which is useless on
windows).
In the other case, it is encoded in base64.
PowerMail uses InternetConfig to determine if a file is a mac format or
not; you can edit InternetConfig settings in the preferences of
InternetExplorer.

Jérôme - PowerMail Engineering

-
   "Avec PowerMail, on n'éblouit pas l'utilisateur avec des icônes et des
fioritures partout, on fait dans l'efficace. Et là où les auteurs de ce
logiciel font très fort, c'est que malgré cette politique d'interface,
le logiciel reste agréable et totalement intégré au style Aqua. Beau et
pratique, il fallait le faire !"
  PowerMail revue on www.cuk.ch

 Download a demo version from www.ctmdev.com
-

Re: Force Attachment Encoding

[Andy Fragen]

*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
Or you can use More Internet 1.0


-- 
Andy Fragen

On Tue, Aug 12, 2003, PowerMail Engineering said:

>Christian Roth wrote:
>
>>using PM 4.2b1, how can I force PM to send an attachment using, say
>>Base64 encoding? PM keeps telling me that the attachment will be
>>corrupted when sent with the specified encoding and that it will use
>>"Smart" instead. Sure enough, the file probably has a resource fork, but
>>I know for sure that the receiver will only read the data fork and losing
>>the resource is what I want.
>
>PowerMail uses InternetConfig's file mapping settings to determine if the
>resource fork contains essential data ("macintosh file"), based on the
>file's type/creator or file name extension. On Mac OS 8/9, file mappings
>are editable in the Internet control panel (advanced tab, which is
>available only in advanced mode). On Mac OS X, you need to use
>InternetExplorer's file helper preference pane.

Re: Force Attachment Encoding

[PowerMail Engineering]

Christian Roth wrote:

>using PM 4.2b1, how can I force PM to send an attachment using, say
>Base64 encoding? PM keeps telling me that the attachment will be
>corrupted when sent with the specified encoding and that it will use
>"Smart" instead. Sure enough, the file probably has a resource fork, but
>I know for sure that the receiver will only read the data fork and losing
>the resource is what I want.

PowerMail uses InternetConfig's file mapping settings to determine if the
resource fork contains essential data ("macintosh file"), based on the
file's type/creator or file name extension. On Mac OS 8/9, file mappings
are editable in the Internet control panel (advanced tab, which is
available only in advanced mode). On Mac OS X, you need to use
InternetExplorer's file helper preference pane.

Jérôme - PowerMail Engineering

-
   "This is really the best email client I have ever seen. I love it."
  Lynn M. Loeffel, PowerMail user

 Download a demo version from http://www.ctmdev.com
-

Re(2): attachment encoding

[Ben Kennedy]

On 13 6 2003 at 12:10 pm -0400, Bob Moody wrote:

>Keep in mind that base64 and exe files don't work on a mac.

Um... base64 is standard mime encoding, which PM decodes automatically. 
Stuffit will do it too if you want.  And Rick said that he was sending "a
self extracting stuffit archive for windows [that was] going to a windows
user", so I think he has the .exe situation well in hand.

>Better to use .pdf files and post them to a web server somewhere.

um... pdf?  Did I miss something?  I don't think Rick ever explained what
the content of the arhive was, so where are you coming up with pdf?

-ben

-- 
Ben Kennedy, chief magician
zygoat creative technical services
613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628
http://www.zygoat.ca

Re(2): attachment encoding

[Bob Moody]

Keep in mind that base64 and exe files don't work on a mac.  Better to
use .pdf files and post them to a web server somewhere.

--- 
Bob Moody, owner
Moody Associates
Product Fundraising for schools, sports teams, daycares, church groups,
scouts, and other community groups.

Our main product is your profit!

Our mission is to make it easy for you to reach your fundraising
goals...over and over...year after year.

1986-2003 17 years of excellence!
office: 540-885-3439 or 800-326-9192  (8-4 M-F)
cell: 540-294-9791  toll-free to cell: 866-294-9791 
www.fundraisingcentral.net
www.bobmoody.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
text messaging to cell: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail: 936 Frog Pond Road
Staunton VA 24401-8346
fax 540-885-6670 or toll free 877-936-9192

Replying to message quoted at the bottom of this message.
Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:40:57 -0400

>On 13 6 2003 at 9:44 am -0400, Rick Lecoat wrote:
>
>>Well, I'm trying to avoid the recipient having to possess specific
>>decompression software to open the files, hence the self extracting
>>archive which, by necessity, is an application of sorts. But you're
>>right, there's a good chance that their server will bounce it so maybe I
>>should look at other options. Still, I'm curious to learn why Base64 is
>>not suitable for .exe files, f anyone knows.
>
>Why not post the file to a web server?  Not only will that be more
>efficient on the infrastructure (assuming it's more than a meg or
>something in size), but avoid the virus issue.
>
>Anyway, my suspicion is that your .exe does have a resource fork locally.
> Maybe it's a zero-byte fork, or maybe it contains some benign
>information related to the app that last used it (e.g. in the manner that
>BBEdit stores window positioning, etc. in the rsrc fork of text files).
>
>-ben
>
>
>-- 
>Ben Kennedy, chief magician
>zygoat creative technical services
>613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628
>http://www.zygoat.ca
>
>
>
>

Re(2): Attachment encoding

[computer artwork by subhash]

[PowerMail Engineering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 29.4.2004 um 10:26 Uhr:]

>If the attachment is known to be a mac format, ...

Thanks for your answer BUT I don't understand. I thought Mail.app uses
Apple double encoding. Then why could the windows user read the PDF sent
with Mail.app and not with PM? Your answer suggests that he could read
the PDF anyway encoded in Apple double or in base64. Or have I understood
it completely wrong?

-- 
http://www.subhash.at