Hi Kyle, et al., First, my apologies for double posting my original email. Please see my comments below.
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 07:33 AM PDT, Kyle Wheeler wrote: ... Text Deleted ... KW> The idea is that the quotes are essentially an artifact of the internal KW> formatting of RFC 822-style email (aka: ALL email), and shouldn't be KW> displayed in their literal form any more than any of the other encoding KW> details should be. KW> KW> > And because of that--and that fact that I am using the old indent patch KW> > (patch-cvs.jmy.indent.1)--the patch is essentially rendered null and void. KW> KW> Eh? Why, what's it do? For some reason, when I receive email from a colleague, the From: line looks like this (of course, without the indentation): From: email_address // format 1 rather than this: From: First Last <email_address> // format 2 But in Outlook, it appears like this: From: "First Last" <email_address> // format 3 I checked my mbox in /var/mail and at least it's the same in there. That is, emails from colleagues appear in format 1. But, I do receive some emails (from non-colleagues) where the double quotes are present. And in the reply from you, the From: line was in format 2; thus the indent patch prepended "KW>" for your verbiage--as expected. KW> > Any ideas why I am not receiving the header intact just as it was sent? KW> KW> Chances are, you *are* receiving the header intact. They just aren't being KW> displayed. KW> KW> Is this a problem, or are you just curious about the reasoning? Sorry, yes this is a bit of a problem. The indent patch is trying to parse the From: line and extract the initials of the sender. But in my case, since the sender's name is not present in the From: line, the functionality of the patch is unusable. I'm trying to figure out where in the email transmission/reception process the names are being stripped for me, and why. But after looking at my raw mbox, this is not a mutt issue. Thanks for the reply. Regards, -- Mun
