Jon Steinhart wrote:
I feel the same way about having the attachment header containing full
mhbuild directives. Not sure what you get from that; if you want to
do mhbuild directives, do 'em in the body, it still works. The whole idea
The attach command is convenient though. Perhaps if the -attach option
is not set in .mh_profile, attach could add an mhbuild directive to the
body.
Jon Steinhart wrote:
enough, what I'm suggesting is that
forw 123
when the folder is my inbox make a message that begins with
X-MH-Attachment: /home/Mail/jon/inbox/123
Using the same mechanism for mime forwards just reinforces the idea of
using mhbuild directives in the header: this could be a #forw directive.
I don't really like the idea of it attempting to guess if the file is a
message because it would sometimes get it wrong.
It wouldn't be hard to be backward compatible with X-MH-Attachment that
contain just a filename. I also can't see that it is making the
attachment stuff any harder to use. It is merely providing a little more
control for someone that wants it.
Oliver
This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied,
disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended
recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all
copies and inform the sender. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers