From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ken Olum Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#26918: 25.2; rmail edit corrupts mail if content-type header not displayed Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:06:41 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1496761632 11806 195.159.176.226 (6 Jun 2017 15:07:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 15:07:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 26918@debbugs.gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 06 17:07:07 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dIG4Z-0002qT-Jd for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 17:07:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38775 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIG4e-0001mL-VF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:07:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44487) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIG4Y-0001mG-9i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:07:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIG4V-0007fN-2T for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:07:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:57114) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dIG4U-0007fI-Uq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:07:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dIG4U-0004Ys-M9 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:07:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Ken Olum Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 15:07:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 26918 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 26918-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B26918.149676160417509 (code B ref 26918); Tue, 06 Jun 2017 15:07:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 26918) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jun 2017 15:06:44 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59791 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dIG4B-0004YJ-So for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:06:44 -0400 Original-Received: from cosmos.phy.tufts.edu ([130.64.84.253]:56956) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dIG4A-0004YC-CG for 26918@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:06:42 -0400 Original-Received: from kdo by cosmos.phy.tufts.edu ([local]:local) with local id 1dIG49-0006mo-IV - Using Exim-4.84 (MandrivaLinux) MTA (return-path ); Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:06:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Glenn Morris on Mon, 05 Jun 2017 17:16:56 -0400) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:133343 Archived-At: From: Glenn Morris Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 17:16:56 -0400 It seems neither rmail user has an opinion. ;) That bad, is it? What do you suggest? I'd be in favor of looking first at the edited message, and if there is no Content-Type header there, looking at the full headers of the original message. If Content-Type is ignored, but the user adds one in the edit buffer, I would replace the original one in the message with the new one supplied by the user. I think this is the general way that added headers are handled. Ken