In article <4d775095.30...@druck.org.uk>, David J. Ruck <dr...@druck.org.uk> wrote: > On 09/03/2011 09:53, Brian Bailey wrote:
> [Mimemap] > > I've got both the new and the old files open in front of me at the > > moment and there appear to be significant differences between the two, > > just related to Archive, zip and other related file types. I have to > > ask, because I have no way of understanding/assessing these > > differences myself, is 20110307 'correct', please? > The moto of the story is; don't update system files which you don't > understand with those from 3rd parties, if your machine is working > correctly - i.e. it hasn't been recommended to solve a particular > problem you have experienced. What does correctly look like? Recommended by whom? I've worked on very large nuclear power reactors, they worked 'correctly', but I don't ever want to work on one again. I'm not sure that many other people understood them either. 8-) As far as possible my machine has been updated regularly, with care, otherwise the blessed thing would be no different from the day that I took it out of it's cardboard box. And, without doubt it was worth it. Mostly, it works, QED. > This isn't the first time there have been problems with Tim's mimemap > files. Thank you. I was unaware of that, not having seen any other adverse comments elsewhere before. Undoubtedly one does trip up from time to time. However, I have 'heeded the gypsies warning' as the saying goes and reverted to the original file. Cheers
