Messages in this thread | | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Why not "attach" patches? | Date | 22 Jan 2002 10:17:37 -0800 |
| |
Followup to: <E16Sh69-0001iV-00@starship.berlin> By author: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > Kmail's patch-mangling problems seem to be all gone in kmail 2.2+. The only > thing to be careful about is that word wrap should be off. Since I > forgot to > turn it off a couple of times I now leave it permanently off and turn it on > for individual mails as needed. >
The common ground most people seems to be able to accept is:
a. Go ahead and make patches as attachments, if your MUA makes it easier; b. Be bloody certain they're text/plain attachments.
-hpa -- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <amsp@zytor.com> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |