From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/27358 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Hrvoje Niksic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Responding to a MIME attachment Date: 01 Dec 1999 14:42:49 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <9t9u2m2bwva.fsf@mraz.iskon.hr> References: <9t9r9h6ewpb.fsf@mraz.iskon.hr> <2nvh6ivl4b.fsf@tiger.jia.vnet> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035164396 24105 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 01:39:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 01:39:56 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from bart.math.uh.edu (bart.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.48]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA00163 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 08:43:26 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by bart.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAB32063; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:43:17 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 01 Dec 1999 07:43:31 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA19964 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 07:43:21 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from mraz.iskon.hr (root@mraz.iskon.hr [195.29.170.8]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA00156 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 08:42:52 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from hniksic@localhost) by mraz.iskon.hr (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-6) id OAA04734; Wed, 1 Dec 1999 14:42:50 +0100 Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Attribution: Hrvoje X-Face: &{dT~)Pu6V<0y?>3p$;@vh\`C7xB~A0T-J%Og)J,@-1%q6Q+, gs<-9M#&`I8cJp2b1{vPE|~+JE+gx;a7%BG{}nY^ehK1"q#rG O,Rn1A_Cy%t]V=Brv7h writes: > I guess the message is not message/rfc822 attachment but old format > forward and the part is generated by mm-uu. To verify my conjecture, > type (C-u g). Yes, that's the case. The problem with the mm-uu stuff is that it makes things _look_ as if you know what's going on, except you don't, and things fail mysteriously. > I think we need a reply function on a mm part. That might be a bit of a clutter, because you'd then also need a wide-reply function, a send-forward function, an include-into-digest function, etc. What we need is a way to insert the part into a summary, so you can do with it whatever you'd normally do with summary buffers. One more reason why C-d should use the mm stuff. :-)