[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: MIME QP encoded good/bad ...

On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> Linus, please use MUTT or PINE -- hmm... you do use PINE, so what
> is the problem at receiving MIME attachments, or QP encoded material
> at all ? (Aside of pine possibly saving/piping non-decoded QP
> text/plain message into file/pipe in original encoded form ?
> Hmm.. That is a though problem at the user agent...)

I do use PINE, and I still think QP is buggy and a stupid excersize. Mail
delivery should have been cleaned up, not the user agent. You could have
done the equivalent of QP inside sendmail, and none of the stupid QP
issues would ever ever have happened (sure, people with old sendmails
would have seen the QP-encoding, but that's THEIR problem).

I save mails with "save". Not "save attachement". And pine will save the
raw mail.

Repeat after me: QP is evil. Most of the time these days nobody needs to
care any more, but that doesn't change the fact that QP is the DOS of
email: backwards compatibility crap that should not have been there.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:39    [W:0.090 / U:1.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site