From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/85549 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Recent Emacs doesn't respect my mailcap Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:01:08 +0800 Message-ID: <87ppa1rkp7.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87386xf5gx.fsf@building.gnus.org> <87386xdmzp.fsf@building.gnus.org> <87h9vdc7cn.fsf@building.gnus.org> <87egqhrmzv.fsf@gmx.us> <87a915c5an.fsf@building.gnus.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1422327305 22372 80.91.229.3 (27 Jan 2015 02:55:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 02:55:05 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M33789@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Jan 27 03:55:05 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YFwIw-00039m-7A for ding-account@gmane.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 03:55:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1YFwIn-0008SH-Vd; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:54:54 -0600 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1YFwIm-0008S5-Mc for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:54:52 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1YFwIh-0001ZG-WF for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:54:52 -0600 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YFwIf-0001H4-Tw for ding@gnus.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 03:54:45 +0100 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YFwId-0002q2-22 for ding@gnus.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 03:54:45 +0100 Original-Received: from 221.218.165.215 ([221.218.165.215]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 03:54:43 +0100 Original-Received: from eric by 221.218.165.215 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 03:54:43 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 23 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 221.218.165.215 User-Agent: Gnus/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:EgmN2QDJlOFyNH+n9SawvSvw0Zc= X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin (3.4.0 2014-02-07) analysis follows Bayesian score: 0.0000 Ham tokens: 0.000-46--2709h-0s--0d--bug, 0.000-5--270h-0s--0d--PDF, 0.000-4--218h-0s--0d--writes, 0.000-4--206h-0s--0d--specified, 0.000-4--205h-0s--0d--H*M:fsf Spam tokens: 0.994-1617--55h-845s--0d--HTo:D*gnus.org, 0.993-1686--65h-885s--0d--Hx-spam-relays-external:quimby.gnus.org, 0.993-1686--65h-885s--0d--H*RU:quimby.gnus.org, 0.993-1681--70h-885s--0d--H*RT:80.91.231.51, 0.993-1681--70h-885s--0d--Hx-spam-relays-internal:quimby.gnus.org Autolearn status: no autolearn_force=no -1.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [80.91.229.3 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS From and EnvelopeFrom 2nd level mail domains are different 1.2 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 2.0 FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2 No description available. List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:85549 Archived-At: Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > Rasmus writes: > >>> Is that a bug or is it supposed to be that way? >> >> A bug, I hope! > > It was just me putting a non-existent viewer into the ~/.mailcap file, > so it was filtered out again later. So that bit works. > > So the issue is really whether we should keep preferring Lisp-based > (internal) viewers over external ones, even though the user has > specified this in ~/.mailcap (or otherwise). > > That way of sorting seems to have been in place since 1998. But is it a > good idea? In my use case, I've already told Gnus to view the PDF externally by using `gnus-article-view-part-externally'. Given that, and the fact that I've specified an external viewer in ~/.mailcap, it seems a little perverse that I'm still stuck seeing it in Doc View. If I wanted to do that, I could have just called `gnus-article-view-part'!