Re: Off Topic: Mailing Agents?
On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Martin F. Krafft wrote:
>also sprach Adam Bell (on Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:04:35PM -0400):
>> Okay, so can anyone tell me what popular (to Debian Users) MUA sends every
>> single message as an attachment to an empty message?
>
>as others have said, it's micro$oft's inability to stick to standards
>--- PGP/GPG nowadays uses MIME for signed and encrypted messages,
>which mickysoft can't handle...
I'm not too happy with some of the factual errors here.
1) PGP/GPG doesn't use anything: {p|g,g|p,p|g} is perfectly happy
encrypting anything you throw at it: it's a command line utility, designed
for use with STDIN and STDOUT.
2) if you can use "nowadays", it's not that standard. Standards are
pretty much defined by their static quality, hence the fact that RFCs
aren't edited, they're superceded.
3) This is one of the few cases where it's not MS's fault. Mutt made some
spectacular changes, and defined a standard to fit them (SOP so far).
Nobody else has really implemented the standard, yet mutt users yell and
scream that everyone else is not standards compliant. The rest of the
world IS compliant, just not to mutt's amended standards. To be precise,
there's a mode in mutt that breaks even pine compatibility: a signed
message shows up as an attachment under some circumstances. I have no
fears that pine's going to arbitrarily run code, but I just trash the "all
attachment" messages anyway: life's too short to deal with non-inline
text. I haven't had this problem on d-u, I found out about the mode on
another list, and FWIU it takes a pretty perverse person to make the
setting.
>martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
> \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; net@madduck
>
--
Galt's sci-fi paradox: Stormtroopers versus Redshirts to the death.
Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!
Reply to: