On 2008-03-27 11:21:15 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 01:00:29AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-03-22 16:28:43 +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
The user isn't assumed to run under UTF-8. The user is assumed to
run in a consistent environment in which the terminal,
Hello Dan, and much thanks for your contributions.
On Thursday, March 20, 2008 at 11:10:53 -0700, Dan Fandrich wrote:
Here's a patch to allow compilation on old systems without strtok_r.
The patch compiles, but on old systems uses strtok() instead of
strtok_r(). Such Mutt will misparse
#3040: charset difference between index browser and pager
Comment (by Derek Martin):
{{{
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:14:30AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-03-27 11:21:15 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 01:00:29AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-03-22
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:14:30AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-03-27 11:21:15 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 01:00:29AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-03-22 16:28:43 +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
The user isn't assumed to run under UTF-8. The user is
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:36:58PM +0100, Alain Bench wrote:
The patch compiles, but on old systems uses strtok() instead of
strtok_r(). Such Mutt will misparse some URLs, as reported in bugs:
| #2968 (Debian #426148): mailto:; URL parsing stops at references
header
| Debian bug
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 08:33:00AM -0700, Dan Fandrich wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:36:58PM +0100, Alain Bench wrote:
...due to recursive calls to strtok(). We'd need a replacement
strtok_r() for systems where it lacks.
Hmmm, I didn't notice the recursion--that explains the change
