On Sunday, November 4 at 04:06 PM, quoth Michael Tatge:
* On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 Mutt wrote:Comment (by pdmef): Just for the record: $rfc2047_parameters should do the trick.Is there any reason to have $rfc2047_parameters?
The muttrc man page has the answer to your question. To wit:
Note that this use of RFC 2047's encoding is explicitly,
prohibited by the standard, but nevertheless encountered in the
wild.
In essence, forcing mutt to interpret such encoding technically
invalidates otherwise perfectly valid file names. For example,
technically, this is valid:
Content-Type: IMAGE/JPEG; name="=?wonky,no?Q?failure?="If mutt was to allow this encoding (which explicitly forbidden), it would tend to generate a failure when it wasn't supposed to.
Why doesn't mutt do it right in the first place?
It *does* do it right, where "right" is defined by the applicable standards (RFCs).
~Kyle --It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him.
-- Abraham Lincoln
Attachment:
pgp5oz9jvbbtG.pgp
Description: PGP signature