On 14:46 Fri 02 Jun, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> Thanks for the patch! Normally I don't touch the .po files, but in this
> case I understand why you did.
>
> The change makes sense to me, but sometimes it's the tiniest things that
> cause the most controversy. So I'm going to give this a couple d
A moment ago I sent 8 images as attachment with mutt.
Three were garbled on arrival.
As it turns out, five of the images were sent using MIME type
application/octet-strteam, and the corrupted ones using text/plain.
The images were similar, with similar names and structure,
so it looks like a rando
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 22:12:47 +0200, Andries E. Brouwer wrote:
> [The structure of the corruption was also funny: the files were full of
> NUL bytes, but these were faithfully preserved. But there were a few
> sequences 15 12 (octal), that were interpreted as CR LF
> and converted to LF so that
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 10:12:47PM +0200, Andries E. Brouwer wrote:
> Clearly, this 10% test is completely bogus.
>
> More in particular, I think that a file is binary if it contains even
> a single NUL byte.
>
> What is the reason for this test?
>
> Should I propose a patch?
I proposed a patch
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 02:44:51PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 10:12:47PM +0200, Andries E. Brouwer wrote:
> > Clearly, this 10% test is completely bogus.
> >
> > More in particular, I think that a file is binary if it contains even
> > a single NUL byte.
> >
> > Wha
On 05Jun2017 22:12, Andries E. Brouwer wrote:
A moment ago I sent 8 images as attachment with mutt.
Three were garbled on arrival.
As it turns out, five of the images were sent using MIME type
application/octet-strteam, and the corrupted ones using text/plain.
The images were similar, with simi
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 03:35:28PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 02:44:51PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 10:12:47PM +0200, Andries E. Brouwer wrote:
> > > Clearly, this 10% test is completely bogus.
> > >
> > > More in particular, I think
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 09:15:23AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 05Jun2017 22:12, Andries E. Brouwer wrote:
>> A moment ago I sent 8 images as attachment with mutt.
>> Three were garbled on arrival.
>
> Just for some more context, did the files lack a useful file extension?
No mime-type was
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 09:15:23AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> Kevin, on the subject of the heuristic, would it be worth getting mutt to
> consult the user.mime_type xattr value? The freedesktop stuff (IIRC)
> recommends that as a place to store a content-type association for a file;
> it has t
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 02:14:11PM +0300, Consus wrote:
> On 14:46 Fri 02 Jun, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> > Thanks for the patch! Normally I don't touch the .po files, but in this
> > case I understand why you did.
> >
> > The change makes sense to me, but sometimes it's the tiniest things that
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
