Hall Stevenson wrote: > For what it's worth (and I use OE to read this list at work), > the original message from David De Graff showed up with no > attachments. Shouldn't be a surprise though as it was sent > with OE, read by OE, and no PGP used. Right. If you don't PGP-sign your messages, don't send HTML mail, and make sure OE wraps lines, then OE's outgoing messages are okay. > -- Paul Johnson's message shows up normally but has one > attachment: msg.pgp That's old-style signing, which fails to include attachments in the signed data. I'm not sure there was ever really a proper standard that covered that kind of signing. > -- Adrian von Bidder's message was the "pain in the ass" > kind... :-) Both the message text and a signature.asc file > showed up as attachments. That's modern standards-compliant MIME-based signing, the kind everyone is supposed to do. > -- Karsten M Self replied to a message in a different thread > and his is also the "pain in the ass" kind. It's different > than Adrian's though. It consisted of a message text > attachment and a 'ATT00106.dat' attachment. Same as Adrian's, just different names. I think OE generates those ATT...dat filenames itself when the MIME data doesn't include a filename (and there's no reason for a filename here, as it's just a digital signature, not an attachment). > I tried a PGP 'plug-in' for OE once but it made no difference. > I believe it was from McAfee/Network Associates. Having dealt with engineers at McAfee in the past, I am disinclined to use anything of theirs ever again. Also, of course, McAfee is primarily an anti-virus company, which is to say, a bunch of ambulance-chasing jackasses who profit off fear and go out of their way to generate more fear so as to generate more profits. > So, would everyone please re-configure their setup to function > like Paul Johnson's does ?? :-) No. My setup is standards-compliant, and you're asking me to break it. > Paul, care to share your setup > for others to see ?? Of course, I don't expect anyone to > change their "my setup ain't broken, yours is" mail program > for us lowly M$ Outlook and Outlook Express users... But your setup _is_ broken. And remember that there are other amusing games that people can play on users of defective software like OE. Email viruses aside, I could have made this entire message unreadable to you by simply beginning the text with "begin Hall Stevenson quote:" rather than "Hall Stevenson wrote:", due to OE's idiotic implementation of automatic uudecoding. > (if you fail to see the humour or jest in this, I feel sorry > for you...) I see the humor in it, but it seems like the defensive kind of humor that people use when they don't want to admit that they really just ought to fix their own problems. Your mailer, by any rational standard, is grossly defective, and its maker refuses to fix the problems, and also refuses to empower you to fix it yourself (it's closed-source). It's beyond me why anyone would choose to tolerate that, but it's your choice to do so. Craig
Attachment:
pgpGcBfAy2Slx.pgp
Description: PGP signature