Am 04.03.2017 um 11:32 schrieb Charles Philip Chan:
Stefan Seyfried
writes: Even though the MIME sent by Emacs looks fishy to my untrained eye.
Why does it look fishy>
Charles
Quote:
========================================================================
Message-ID: <87a892ggux.fsf@karnak>
[...]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="===-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
--===-=-=
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
--=-=-=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==-=-="
--==-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
"H.Merijn Brand"
Emacs would have been a better counter-example. ed, ex and vi were ========================================================================
And in Thunderbird it looked like:
========================================================================
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
"H.Merijn Brand"
Emacs would have been a better counter-example. ed, ex and vi were
standard, and they just had one single function: edit a file. (g)vim, ========================================================================
The Content-* is probably not intended as part of the "payload" of the message but should be hidden from the reader. If that is Thunderbird's or Emacs' fault? No idea. -- Stefan Seyfried "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org