On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 12:56:16PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 11:41, Colin Watson wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 12:11:16PM -0400, Mike Mueller wrote: > > > On Tuesday 30 September 2003 02:05, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > Seems > > > > like about the only way we're going to get a reasonable handle on this > > > > barring ISPs refusing to carry executables in email format. > > > > > > Hear! Hear! No more attachments - period. I'll settle for elimination of > > > any known sort of executable though. > > > > While I agree with the second, the first is wrong. If nothing else, > > MIME-attached files are an excellent way to transport patches safely, > > avoiding various mangling that can happen to inline text. > > Anything that you don't want mangled, it's good for. dmesg and syslog > output also come to mind. PGP signatures spring to mind, too. -- ,-------------------------------------------------------------------------. > -ScruLoose- | Why can't we ever attempt to solve a problem < > Please do not | in this country without having a 'War' on it? < > reply off-list. | - Rich Thomson, talk.politics.misc < `-------------------------------------------------------------------------'
Attachment:
pgpy8G9kb1Gju.pgp
Description: PGP signature