On 2011/03/25 18:22 (GMT-0400) Jeff Mahoney composed:
Felix, the attachment was a standard email forward.
At least in the cases of Marco's and my UAs, there are two types of "standard" forwards: inline true attachment He used: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; it; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.9 to create the latter form, while his UA is a virtual twin to my 3 week older, yet newer, User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; Warp 4.5; rv:2.0b12pre) Gecko/20110210 SeaMonkey/2.1b3pre both of which are perfectly capable of attaching inline. In the inline case, our UAs display the "attachment" as ordinary content, meaning its content type is perfectly apparent, unlike the attachment type, which AFAIK neither TB nor SM explain by default, only by taking optional steps a person like me who receives upwards of 400 emails a day has no interest in wasting time on. BTW, the UA string, if conformantly provided in the email headers by the sending UA, is displayed by my UA automatically. I don't have to guess, or dig, to find out if email sent to me was sent by SM or TB any of several other _modern_ and competent email programs that know how to include a sending UA string along with the panoply of other headers. Any here like Ken implying that my UA is incompetent or otherwise deficient by suggesting I "upgrade" my latest available version of modern open source email software need only know I use what I use because it is a 100% cross-platform product, and as a heavy user of it it enables me to provide competent support for it even to clueless users on Mac, eComStation, Windows - and even Linux, as well as to spot and report its bugs on bugzilla.mozilla.org. Isn't that part of what this mailing list is about, using devel software, and finding and reporting and testing fixes for found bugs?
The irony is that you're the one asking for help, he offered it, you've ignored it,
I didn't ignore it his email. As you've obviously seen I responded to it. What I ignored was the marginally described attachment. Maybe at another time I _might_ have recognized his use of the word annex, but since in the 75+ US language email lists I've been on in more than a decade there is one standard word used for stuff other than freshly typed text attached to an email, "attachment", while "annex" is a word that seems in this country at least usually reserved for use in a real estate context, I didn't make his connection.
and are now berating him over how he gave it to you. Not exactly a great incentive to offer help.
Arguably true, but at the time and still I don't consider what I wrote to be berating. No one's perfect, least of all me.
Now if the attachment was an image or some other irrelevant thing, then fine - but it was a standard email message.
As result of SOP here, since due to the vast majority of email having attachments in fact being spam and this particular message's attachment type and size not apparent, all attachment emails are categorically given equivalent treatment, either straight to trash in entirety, or attachments to the trash as separate process if there is actual relevant textual content. Meanwhile, the thread is now comprised primarily of posts that have nothing to do with the subject problem (unfortunately, nothing unusual for an openSUSE mailing list). Are he and I the only two people on this list who find the quality of mirrorbrain unacceptable? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org