I seem to be mistaken about the degree to which this is standardized and
supported. The Debian argument cinches it for me. Quoted printable is
probably the right way to go, then.
On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 08:17:53PM -0400, Drew DeVault wrote:
> On 2018-07-01 6:15 PM, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > Are you suggesting that we not limit lines to 998 octets? I've seen
> > lots of mail servers that do reject mail over 998 octets. I've
> > configured Postfix to do so because being
On 2018-07-01 6:15 PM, brian m. carlson wrote:
> Can you say a bit more about the exact error message you're seeing?
"patch contains a line longer than 998 characters"
A recent occasion when this came up was when someone attempted to send
me a patch which included a base64-encoded data URI,
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 03:07:51PM -0400, Drew DeVault wrote:
> The purpose of this configuration option is to prevent your emails from
> blowing up on SMTP servers (rather than Extended SMTP servers). However,
> I find it often confuses people whose patches are otherwise correct, and
> they don't
The purpose of this configuration option is to prevent your emails from
blowing up on SMTP servers (rather than Extended SMTP servers). However,
I find it often confuses people whose patches are otherwise correct, and
they don't know how to solve the issue.
I haven't seen an SMTP server in a very
5 matches
Mail list logo
