-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Scott Bennett @ 2008/07/22 23:21: > On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:02:10 +0200 Ansgar Wiechers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> On 2008-07-21 Scott Bennett wrote: >>> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:24:22 +0200 "=?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1s_Arribas?=" >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy >>>> b3RvY29scyBpZiBpdAo+IGNhbiBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLiAgVGhhdCdzIGZvciBwcm90b2NvbC1zcGVj >>>> [remainder of junk deleted --SB] >>> Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? >>> It's bad enough that some insist upon posting their message along with an >>> HTML duplicate, but at least there is usually some original text content. >> As per RFC 2045 base64 is a valid transfer encoding for a message body. >> It was declared correctly in the header, too. What kind of MUA do you >> use that won't decode this for you? > > I'm using mailx(1), which is the SysV equivalent of UCBmail, the staple > of UNIX systems for decades. It is safe, reliable, and either mailx or > UCBmail is found on just about every kind of UNIX still in use today. It > handles mail headers and plain, ASCII text. If you want to use other > character sets in private email, that's fine, but it's not appropriate to do > so on mailing lists.
this is silly, but.... mailx needs a patch, then. it may have been created during a time when ASCII was all that was needed. but, times change. lot's of other people out there use non-ASCII characters, and UTF-8 is starting to become a standard character set. like was mentioned, the e-mail conformed to RFC standards. if your client can't handle these standards then you are complaining to the wrong people (read: write to the authors of mailx! ;-) ). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQFIhnwkXhfCJNu98qARCEzdAKCic9ngtlxLINz13xYP1QJVUmYOuQCeMrto i1rYKNENY2eWSReoJWnzEgU= =Ve0K -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----