From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 2 15:50:36 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA20713 for freebsd-chat-outgoing; Wed, 2 Sep 1998 15:50:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail.camalott.com (mail.camalott.com [208.203.140.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA20697 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 1998 15:50:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from joelh@gnu.org) Received: from detlev.UUCP (tex-141.camalott.com [208.229.74.141]) by mail.camalott.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA20736; Wed, 2 Sep 1998 17:51:11 -0500 Received: (from joelh@localhost) by detlev.UUCP (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA06393; Wed, 2 Sep 1998 17:49:15 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from joelh) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 17:49:15 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199809022249.RAA06393@detlev.UUCP> To: grog@lemis.com CC: green@unixhelp.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: <19980902160634.G606@freebie.lemis.com> (message from Greg Lehey on Wed, 2 Sep 1998 16:06:34 +0930) Subject: Re: E-day problems: rtld-elf dlsym() broken? From: Joel Ray Holveck Reply-to: joelh@gnu.org References: <199809020322.WAA03118@detlev.UUCP> <19980902160634.G606@freebie.lemis.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >> Guys, can we *please* start sending code snippets as plain text? MIME >> attachments are fine, just don't use base64. I will usually give code >> in plain text in a message a once-over, but it's more of a hassle to >> do so in base64. > Can't pine autodecode base64 transparently? I don't know. Most MUAs that I've used handle text/* like anything else-- as an attachment. I can read MIME attachments fine, but it's extra work that, after a long day of work, makes the difference between me reading an attachment and hitting 'd'. Granted, it's not much work to decode it to another buffer. But let's consider Jordan's Theorem: If users outnumber the programmers 1000:1, then it's worth a programmer 1000 minutes to code something that will save each user 1 minute. > It seems to me that we should agree on some base set of functionality > that a reasonable mailer should support. It would be nice, but it really seems more like it goes the other way around. Decide what your audience is likely to support, and use it. > 1. MIME MIME is the only real machine-readable standard for attachments, except the '---- cut here ----' convention (which wasn't frequently supported by MUAs anyway). Since non-conforming MUAs can read it fine, call it necessary if you're making attachments. > 2. base 64 Almost necessary if you're attaching binaries. (The alternative, uuencode, is probably less supported nowdays if sent as a MIME attachment, but I don't know.) > 3. 8 bit code No. This chokes MTAs. Every time I send a message with Soren's name written in 8-bit, I get about 9 or 10 MTA bounce messages. Most MUAs will not choke on it, thankfully. > 4. html IBWNI..., but it's a lot of cybercrud that's usually unnecessary. I haven't seen one html-formatted message that actually got benefit from being in html. Usually it's used by people using MS Outlook who assume it's universal. And, if at all possible, have a text/plain alternative. > 5. PostScript No. Too many tty's still. (I consider this part of 'images', although it seems less supported than your common rasters.) > 6. RTF (can anybody decipher it?) You mean M$'s RTF that Outlook prefers, or RFC-1563's text/enriched that Emacs supports? > 7. images Only when necessary. But since images to a list are usually rude (I mean impolite to send, not tasteless in content), then let's say that it is normally good to coordinate with the other party. Best, joelh -- Joel Ray Holveck - joelh@gnu.org - http://www.wp.com/piquan Fourth law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message