From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/6132 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Per Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Mail without `From:' lines Date: 05 May 1996 09:59:44 +0200 Sender: abraham@dina.kvl.dk Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035146633 2656 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:43:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:43:53 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA04585 for ; Sun, 5 May 1996 01:24:02 -0700 Original-Received: from elc1.dina.kvl.dk (elc1.dina.kvl.dk [130.225.40.228]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Sun, 5 May 1996 10:06:12 +0200 Original-Received: from babbage.dina.kvl.dk (babbage.dina.kvl.dk [130.225.40.217]) by elc1.dina.kvl.dk (8.6.12/8.6.4) with ESMTP id JAA22082; Sun, 5 May 1996 09:58:04 +0200 Original-Received: (abraham@localhost) by babbage.dina.kvl.dk (8.6.12/8.6.4) id JAA22590; Sun, 5 May 1996 09:59:44 +0200 Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no X-Face: +kRV2]2q}lixHkE{U)mY#+6]{AH=yN~S9@IFiOa@X6?GM|8MBp/ In-Reply-To: "Sudish Joseph"'s message of 04 May 1996 20:10:46 -0400 Original-Lines: 31 X-Mailer: September Gnus v0.80/Emacs 19.30 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6132 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6132 >>>>> "SJ" == Sudish Joseph writes: SJ> Just like it's Pine's intent to transform a random piece of junk into SJ> a format that's suitable for following up to as a USENET message. We SJ> all know how that went, never mind that Pine's usage of Newsgroup SJ> makes more sense in theory. Pine wasn't dealing with random junk and it wasn't doing any transformations, and it went against an established tradition for how to use a particular header. None of these are relevant for the issue at hand, quite the contrary Gnus would be following an established tradition, which mailers like VM has shown works well in practice. It seems to me that converting the 'From ' line in the absence of a `From:' header will be the right thing in all real examples, and no worse than not converting it in hypothetical examples. SJ> To put it simply: SJ> Anything that can be achieved by munging together a From: header by SJ> inspecting From_ can be done by inspecting From_ whenever you do not SJ> see a From:. If that doesn't please you, put the information in an SJ> X-Bogosity: header. Don't mess up a message that might later be SJ> processed by an agent other than GNUS. The `From ' line is an artifact of the mbox format, so leaving it alone is not an option with other backends. Converting is to an `X-' header will break if the message is later read by another mail agent (like VM), who will then not be able to access the information. The only way to preserve the information is to convert the broken message into standard (RFC 822) format.