W liście z pią, 16-05-2003, godz. 13:05, Michał Politowski pisze:
> You obviously haven't read man mailcap.order?
I've read, when you first time told me.
It's just a step to provide that usability like my script.
Please, look at this two opions objectively. Forget, that one of them is
already imp
On Fri, 16 May 2003 12:05:17 +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> Next is replacement for update-mime script to use 'new' format. It
> generates full compatible mailcap file, but inserts just one application
> (x and non x) for each mime type.
You obviously haven't read man mailcap.order?
--
Michał Politowski
I'm attaching two scripts. One just converts 'old'
/usr/lib/mime/packages/ directory to 'new' one. Why I'll explain later.
Next is replacement for update-mime script to use 'new' format. It
generates full compatible mailcap file, but inserts just one application
(x and non x) for each mime type. I
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 06:53:51PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 17:06, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > It is, IMHO.
>
> IMHO not, because doesn't provide things I mentioned before.
>
> > Who says it doesn't?
>
> Like above.
You can just add field types, if required. It w
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 17:06, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> It is, IMHO.
IMHO not, because doesn't provide things I mentioned before.
> Who says it doesn't?
Like above.
> No, but lots of applications use it.
Yes, that's true. Nevertheless, it shouldn't be a brake in improving it.
Regar
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 04:53:32PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 16:38, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > What's that supposed to mean? Doing that does have its advantages, too
> > (such as "you don't have to re-integrate everything with the new
> > system").
> >
> > Granted,
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 16:38, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> What's that supposed to mean? Doing that does have its advantages, too
> (such as "you don't have to re-integrate everything with the new
> system").
>
> Granted, pushing that to extremes will end you up with an unworkable
> system
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 04:05:28PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> > Please point me to where I said we should leave things as they are.
> You didn't say that, but you want use *minimal* solution, which aren't
> always good.
>
> PS1. Windows are done this way. MS created took w2k and sticked
> more,more an
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 15:42, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> Yes it does. Create a ~/.mailcap with the application of your choice for
> a given MIME-type at the top.
>
> My suggestion of a front-end was to create some application that would
> help $USER to manage ~/.mailcap.
I think it's go
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 03:35:33PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 15:23, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > I fail to see why it would be bad. It's not perfect, but that's far from
> > the same thing. Moreover, I think your ideas would make things worse,
> > rather than better.
>
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 15:23, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> I fail to see why it would be bad. It's not perfect, but that's far from
> the same thing. Moreover, I think your ideas would make things worse,
> rather than better.
It's not perfect. Importand bugs are for me:
* doesn't allow to
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 02:46:34PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 14:30, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > Uh. You can create such a tree in-memory, no? Parsing the file is not
> > *that* hard.
>
> Of course, I can. But I don't understand why don't improve BAD
> mechanism.
I f
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 14:30, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> Uh. You can create such a tree in-memory, no? Parsing the file is not
> *that* hard.
Of course, I can. But I don't understand why don't improve BAD
mechanism. If sth is bad and doesn't pass our requests we should change
it. Is upda
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 02:13:32PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> > > It won't work, because the aren't any 'standards'. I don't have idea how
> > > make x/non-x choice from mailcap. I REALLY think alternatives could be
> > > good.
> >
> > It's done in there, all over the place! There's a 'test' option, w
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 13:49, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> Alternatives and mailcap are two different worlds. Please keep them
> separated.
OK, so leave alternatives.
> > It won't work, because the aren't any 'standards'. I don't have idea how
> > make x/non-x choice from mailcap. I REALL
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:35:22PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 13:30, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > I really think it would be a bad idea to go the alternatives road here.
>
> But why? Could you give me any reasons? I've said why yes, so you tell
> why not ;]
Alternativ
On Thu, 15 May 2003 12:11:03 +0200, mcINEK wrote:
[...]
> We see a conflict. It doesn't matter how many browser user installed,
> always will be run galeon (it's above so it's first - am I right?).
>
> The best solution, I think, is that galeon (mozilla, etc) shouldn't
> provide a /etc/mailcap rec
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 13:30, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> I really think it would be a bad idea to go the alternatives road here.
But why? Could you give me any reasons? I've said why yes, so you tell
why not ;]
> If you must, you could write a front-end that parses /etc/mailcap, and
> f
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 01:24:42PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 13:00, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > Here's your error: if you do that, it's not the user who can change his
> > browser, but the system administrator. Those two are not always the
> > same.
>
> But, does it
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 13:00, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> Here's your error: if you do that, it's not the user who can change his
> browser, but the system administrator. Those two are not always the
> same.
But, does it eliminate my soluton? As you wrote later, user always can
change /et
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:11:03PM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 11:54, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> > If you already parsed mailcap into mc's configuration, you should've
> > seen this (picking out a random one):
> >
> > application/vnd.sun.xml.draw; openoffice '%s'; edit=
W liście z czw, 15-05-2003, godz. 11:54, Wouter Verhelst pisze:
> If you already parsed mailcap into mc's configuration, you should've
> seen this (picking out a random one):
>
> application/vnd.sun.xml.draw; openoffice '%s'; edit=openoffice '%s';
> test=test "$DISPLAY" != "" ; description="Open
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:04:39AM +0200, mcINEK wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I was wondering how to improve mailcap system to become useful.
> First step was to able mc use mailcap. Now, I want to make nautilus to
> use mailcap. And I have a few questions.
>
> 1. Where nautilus (gnome2?) keeps info about
Hello!
I was wondering how to improve mailcap system to become useful.
First step was to able mc use mailcap. Now, I want to make nautilus to
use mailcap. And I have a few questions.
1. Where nautilus (gnome2?) keeps info about mime types?
2. (more complicated) Does run-mailcap differs x and non
24 matches
Mail list logo
