From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Character problems Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 08:28:15 +0200 (IST) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200203262325.g2QNP7w19070@rum.cs.yale.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1017210660 26700 127.0.0.1 (27 Mar 2002 06:31:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 06:31:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Richard Stallman , schwab@suse.de, reingold@emr.cs.iit.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16q6xY-0006wX-00 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 07:31:00 +0100 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16q76M-0001Ow-00 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 07:40:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16q6x6-0006vS-00; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 01:30:32 -0500 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16q6w2-0006he-00; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 01:29:26 -0500 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA06305; Wed, 27 Mar 2002 08:28:15 +0200 (IST) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: <200203262325.g2QNP7w19070@rum.cs.yale.edu> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:2227 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:2227 On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Stefan Monnier wrote: > I'm pretty sure it wasn't in the email I received since it did not get > near any kind of Emacs process on its way from the network to my > screen and yet there were no \201 chars to be seen. > > > Stefan "who still hasn't switched to an Emacs-based MUA" FWIW, I read my mail with RMAIL, and I didn't see \201 in the buffer, either. But I agree with Richard that sending the text as an encoded binary attachment is much more reliable. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel