Ed Hartnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Could you please elaborate? > What is the boundary supposed to look like?
In the header, Content-Type provides the boundary between message parts. That string must appear exactly in the next part. Your sample message claims a Content-Type boundary string which is unrelated to the boundary strings actually in the body. This is a prime example of Gnus' overachieving in MIME; Gnus actually obeys the spec. If a message has been generated by a buggy origin agent, tough: Gnus will deal with it on its merits. Gnus will not guess at what might appear, to fuzzy human thinking, to be a proper MIME indicator. (For example, older Netscape mail would intuit MIMEness in the absence of MIME-Version -- grotesquely wrong behavior.) At a guess, the sender's mailer botched the recursive MIMEness of a forwarded message which in turn had its own MIME content. "Oops." Many mailers have a broken concept of "forwarding" in which they neglect to include _all_ the headers necessary to preserve the message's MIME content descriptors and indicate their own content. Tell the sender to get a real mailer. One that doesn't generate garbage. _______________________________________________ Info-gnus-english mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-gnus-english
