From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kenichi Handa Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: improve rmail's MIME handling Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:34:06 +0900 Message-ID: References: <83r5e874ab.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1290771265 5827 80.91.229.12 (26 Nov 2010 11:34:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:34:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 26 12:34:21 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PLwZI-0006dm-Ji for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 12:34:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44807 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PLwZH-0003fO-Uq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 06:34:19 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48922 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PLwZB-0003fG-V0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 06:34:14 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PLwZA-0004ok-VG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 06:34:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.aist.go.jp ([150.29.246.133]:37704) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PLwZ8-0004o6-LM; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 06:34:11 -0500 Original-Received: from rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp (rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp [150.29.254.115]) by mx1.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id oAQBY7jr005229; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:34:07 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: from smtp3.aist.go.jp by rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id oAQBY6On016190; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:34:06 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: by smtp3.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id oAQBY6iu017905; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:34:06 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: from handa by etlken with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PLwZ4-0003hZ-DL; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:34:06 +0900 In-Reply-To: <83r5e874ab.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Fri, 26 Nov 2010 12:44:28 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 9 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:133158 Archived-At: In article <83r5e874ab.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii writes: > > Now the default value of rmail-enable-mime is t, and thus a MIME > > message is properly decoded in RMAIL buffer automatically. > Why is this a good idea, especially on the Emacs 23 branch, in the > middle of a pretest? I interpreted Stefan and Yidong's "go ahead" as so. > Previously, Rmail would never do anything with > attachments without my say-so, and thus was one of the safest MUAs on > Earth. Why change that now? Rmail still does nothing non-safe thing with attachments. It just shows you something like this line (with proper buttons): Attached image/jpeg file: temp.jpg (281kB) Display instead of showing something like this raw base64 data: Content-Type: image/jpeg Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=temp.jpg Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEAYABgAAD/2wBDAAMCAgMCAgMDAwMEAwMEBQgFBQQEBQoHBwYIDAoMDAsK CwsNDhIQDQ4RDgsLEBYQERMUFRUVDA8XGBYUGBIUFRT/wAALCAO3AqgBAREA/8QAHwAAAQUBAQEB AQEAAAAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtRAAAgEDAwIEAwUFBAQAAAF9AQIDAAQRBRIhMUEGE1Fh .... And, a text content is of course decoded properly, but it had been decoded anyway. The difference is that, with the new code, text contents in multipart (and encoded-words in headers) are also decoded correctly. > Of course, if other Rmail users think we should make it t by default, > I can always customize it back, so if I'm the only one who cares, > let's leave it at t. I vote for `t', but of course I follow the opinion of the majority. --- Kenichi Handa handa@m17n.org