e.
Hm ... was this supposed to be there? I only ask because if it wasn't
and you're using 1.7, we should fix that.
Saw it in another post. When using previous versions of nmh (1.6 and
prior) I never had to have the send: line in my .mh_profile.
Sigh. I guess I should have asked Anthony Bentley why he added -notls
since he started that. But I think Ralph covered that pretty well; to
align with best current practice we changed the default SMTP submission
port to 587. You do not need to add -notls.
Binary files /home/jerry/code/nmh-1.7-RC3/test/testdir/21786.draft and
/home/jerry/code/nmh-1.7-RC3/test/testdir/21786.expected differ
That's ... interesting.
./test/mhbuild/test-attach: test failed, outputs are in
/home/jerry/code/nmh-1.7-RC3/test/testdir/21786.draft and
/home/jerry/code/nmh-1.7-RC3/test/testdir/21786.expected.
FAIL: test/mhbuild/test-attach
I think that might have been cleaned up. Could you do:
make check TESTS=test/mhbuild/test-attach
And then let us know what the files that it claimed were different actually
contained?
The difference was in the final section -
(9052.expected contains)
Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="nulls"
Content-Description: nulls
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="nulls"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0--
(9052.draft contains):
Content-Type: binary/; name="nulls"
Um, wow. A Content-Type of binary/ ????
I am curious .... if you grep through config.status for the following
variables:
MIMETYPEPROC
MIMEENCODINGPROC
What do they return? It might be something like
file --brief --dereference --mime-type
And what happens when you run that command on the file test/mhbuild/nulls ?
--Ken
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers