From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/24143 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: [0.91, bug?] Handles image/gif improper Date: 11 Jul 1999 11:17:03 +0200 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035161760 7100 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 00:56:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:56:00 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from farabi.math.uh.edu (farabi.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.57]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA02902 for ; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 05:25:48 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by farabi.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAB02716; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 04:22:26 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sun, 11 Jul 1999 04:23:11 -0500 (CDT) 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 EAA03394 for ; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 04:22:28 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from quimbies.gnus.org (bang.netfonds.no [195.1.89.231]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA02819 for ; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 05:21:23 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by quimbies.gnus.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA12768; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:22:04 +0200 Mail-Copies-To: never X-Now-Reading: Patricia McKillip's _Winter Rose_ X-Now-Playing: Joy Division's _Closer_: "Passover" Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Jonas Steverud's message of "10 Jul 1999 10:55:42 +0200" User-Agent: Gnus/5.070096 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.96) XEmacs/21.2 (Sumida) X-Face: &w!^oO~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\ writes: > Yes looks like it, but 0.84 obvious did not... What did that do? Did > it have some variable or what file did it read? I'm curious why 0.84 > worked while 0.91 did not. Hmmm... The mailcap parsing has been improved. > > If you don't want it to take this action, then you should put > > something else in your ~/.mailcap, I guess... > > I'll do that. But I prefer the lisp-way... ;-) You can add rules with `mailcap-add'. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen