Re: recommended mail clients [was] [PATCH] ati-agp suspend/resume support (try 2)

Pavel Machek
2005-12-27T15:45:33Z

On Út 27-12-05 09:20:15, Jason Munro wrote:
> On 4:26:17 pm 26 Dec 2005 Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I use pine and evolution. Pine is text based and great when I
> > >> ssh into my machine to work. Evolution is slow, but plays well
> > >> with pine and it handles things needed for LKML very well. (the
> > >> drop down menu "Normal" may be changed to "Preformat", which
> > >> allows of inserting text files "as-is").
> > >
> > > Dare I say it, KMail has also been doing the Right Thing for a long
> > > time. It will only line wrap things that you insert by typing;
> > > pastes are left untouched.
> > >
> > > This satisfies Linus's demand that all patches be part of the email
> > > body and not an attachment.
> >
> >
> > Do not always blame the MUA, because actually, the MTAs may do
> > anything with the mail text. That's (among other reasons) why things
> > like MIME attachments were invented, because they (their respective
> > uuencoded or base64encoded "text") can be wrapped but does not change
> > the decoded form. - Something like that is in the pine doc.
>
> So which is preferable for someone handling inline patches. A properly
> encoded message text that when decoded with a compliant client accurately
> represents the original text (no whitespace mangling etc), or a message
> text that is accurate in it's raw state but may be altered during transit?

inlined text. I've never seen MTA mangling patch. Maybe 15 years ago...
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!