From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/24086 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Unintended base64 encoding Date: 09 Jul 1999 21:18:44 +0200 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <874skefuuh.fsf@pc-hrvoje.srce.hr> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035161715 6845 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 00:55:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:55:15 +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 PAA25902 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 15:22:03 -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 OAB22929; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:21:40 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Fri, 09 Jul 1999 14:22:25 -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 OAA15804 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:22:00 -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 PAA25833 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 15:20:56 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by quimbies.gnus.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA11873; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 21:34:38 +0200 Mail-Copies-To: never X-Now-Reading: Bryan Cholfin (ed.)'s _The Best of Crank!_ X-Now-Playing: Joe Jackson's _Mike's Murder_ Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: =?iso-8859-1?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pinard's message of "09 Jul 1999 14:44:38 -0400" User-Agent: Gnus/5.070094 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.94) Emacs/20.3 X-Face: &w!^oO~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\ writes: > The most efficient encoding might require creating more subparts to a part. > All QP or all 64 might not be the best way to go. Once away from two > extremes, which is all QP or all 64, recognising that more even subparts > is only an half-hearted solution, why not rather consider optional full > compression with later 64 only? I don't want to create further subparts -- if you split, say, a Postscript file up into oodles of qp, 7bit and base64 parts, I'm guessing that all the king's horses and all the king's men will have some difficulty in putting Humpty Dumpty back together again. So either qp or base64 will have to do. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen