Hi David, > > nmh shouldn't comp(1) a new email today with a NUL in the body, but > > it should be able to read and show(1) one. > > I'm thinking of removing the support in post(8) for sending NULs. Any > disagreement? It's not a lot of code so could be easily restored in > the future if conditions change. > > > Now, how about dist(1) of that old email? I'd have thought it > > should send the old email verbatim, NUL and all. If that causes a > > bounce then the sender can MIME-forward instead with a single > > message/rfc822 part. > > Agreed.
But doesn't dist → send → post so if you remove post's support for sending NULs then dist won't be able to send the old email verbatim. -- Cheers, Ralph.
