On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Liviu Daia wrote:
On 11 November 1998, Doug Monroe <monroe(_at_)lucent(_dot_)com> wrote:
# may also -need- content-length: header??
Don't. Some [*insert your favorite deprecatory adjective here*]
gateways will mess with it sooner or later.
It's not just that; content-length is NOT a standard header, it's an
internal tag for a particular (and slightly broken) variant of the
"From "-separated mailbox format. It should never have been allowed
to leak out into the world.
echo "";\
echo "This is a multi-part message in MIME format.";\
Nah, that's a Pine-ism
Actually, it's something recommended by several revisions of the MIME
standards. The stuff before the first boundary string is a "preamble"
intended for display by old mailers that don't understand MIME. Any
decent MIME mailer will hide it.
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit"; \
echo "";\
echo "heres some plain text message";\
echo "followed by the 'attached' file (inserted by 'cat filename')";\
Another newline here.
Actually not required. If no newline is present, MIME says to interpret
the preceding part as if it did not end with a newline. That may or may
not be what was meant (probably not).
echo "--------------C1BC5999FB7A73F0B7EF99B8";\
echo "Content-Type: application/msword";\
echo " name=\"foo.doc\"";\
Don't write the name twice, forget about "name=..." and just use
"Content-Disposition:".
He really is better off doing both -- some mailers that don't know about
the content-disposition header will recognize the name parameter.
cat /path/to/foo.doc;\ # HERES WHERE THE FILE GETS INSERTED
Replace that by
mmencode </path/to/foo.doc;\
echo ;\
Shouldn't that be "mmencode -b"?