On 25 August 2017 at 23:13, Ken Hornstein <[email protected]>wrote: [ ... send: --notls discussion removed ... ]
>>>>Binary files /home/jerry/code/nmh-1.7-RC3/test/testdir/21786.draft and >>>>/home/jerry/code/nmh-1.7-RC3/test/testdir/21786.expected differ >>> >>> That's ... interesting. >>> >>>>./test/mhbuild/test-attach: test failed, outputs are in >>>>/home/jerry/code/nmh-1.7-RC3/test/testdir/21786.draft and >>>>/home/jerry/code/nmh-1.7-RC3/test/testdir/21786.expected. >>>>FAIL: test/mhbuild/test-attach >>> >>> I think that might have been cleaned up. Could you do: >>> >>> make check TESTS=test/mhbuild/test-attach >>> >>> And then let us know what the files that it claimed were different actually >>> contained? >> >>The difference was in the final section - >> >>(9052.expected contains) >> >>Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="nulls" >>Content-Description: nulls >>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="nulls" >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 >> >>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA >> >>------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0-- >> >>(9052.draft contains): >> >>Content-Type: binary/; name="nulls" > > Um, wow. A Content-Type of binary/ ???? > > I am curious .... if you grep through config.status for the following > variables: > > MIMETYPEPROC > MIMEENCODINGPROC > > What do they return? It might be something like > > file --brief --dereference --mime-type > > And what happens when you run that command on the file test/mhbuild/nulls ? Ken, you were correct on what grep returns: [jerry@unix nmh-1.7-RC3]$ grep MIMETYPEPROC config.status D["MIMETYPEPROC"]=" \"file --brief --dereference --mime-type\"" [jerry@unix nmh-1.7-RC3]$ grep MIMEENCODINGPROC config.status D["MIMEENCODINGPROC"]=" \"file --brief --dereference --mime-encoding\"" Then running the command: [jerry@unix nmh-1.7-RC3]$ file --brief --dereference --mime-type test/mhbuild/nulls binary > > --Ken > jerry _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
