Re: \201 back again

[Karl Eichwalder <keichwa@gmx.net>]

"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@is.elta.co.il> writes:

> Richard's message indeed shows \201 characters, but that's only
> because they were present in the message itself:
>
>       (re-search-forward "[=C2=81=C2=AB=C2=81=C2=BB{}()]" nil t)
>
> See those 0xC2 characters before each 8-bit Latin-9 code?
>
> As for the encoding, it says this:
>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

The archived message lacks this line.  Rmail must learn to add proper
MIME header lines.

> So the question now is how come Richard's Emacs sent such a badly
> encoded message, and why did it think it was in UTF-8 when in fact it
> was in emacs-mule?

Maybe, Emacs asked whether the user wanted to use this "secure
encoding" -- the problem might go away automatically with 21.3 where
unification is enabled.


ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu> writes:

> Don't panic. The original email is emacs-mule encoded without the
> content-type header. You can type `0 g emacs-mule RET' to fix it.

Thanks for tracking down the problem and telling a work around.

-- 
ke@suse.de (work) / keichwa@gmx.net (home):              |
http://www.suse.de/~ke/                                  |      ,__o
Free Translation Project:                                |    _-\_<,
http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/contrib/po/HTML/             |   (*)/'(*)