From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27568 invoked by alias); 14 Dec 2008 21:54:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 27557 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Dec 2008 21:54:45 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:53:56 +0000 Received: from wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.77]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id mBELrrFG022945 for ; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:53:54 -0800 Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com (eyk4.prod.google.com [10.208.11.4]) by wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id mBELrpN0005015 for ; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:53:52 -0800 Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so252921eyk.58 for ; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:53:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.210.127.13 with SMTP id z13mr6959737ebc.29.1229291631412; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:53:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <200812141956.mBEJuoDq010551@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> References: <8f2776cb0812121804n1008f921h3898bb7bda1581c9@mail.gmail.com> <200812132032.mBDKWDxP005595@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <8f2776cb0812132207n4e0f1419l5327a10b5383bd24@mail.gmail.com> <200812141956.mBEJuoDq010551@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: <8ac60eac0812141353h3b8336e8la6a73a4e6aa2fa4c@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: RFA: Building GDB under GLIBC 2.8 From: Paul Pluzhnikov To: Mark Kettenis Cc: jimb@red-bean.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-12/txt/msg00266.txt.bz2 On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Mark Kettenis wrote: >> Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:07:29 -0800 >> From: "Jim Blandy" >> >> > Jim, could you please try sending diffs such that they are readable in >> > a text-based mail reader? >> >> I'm afraid gmail will mangle them if I don't include them as >> attachments. Gmail will actually do text/plain attachment with 7-bit encoding if the attached filename ends in .txt However, it appears that there is some other message rewriting happening elsewhere, because my messages with text/plain/7-bit attachments end up as text/plain/base64 by the time they reach sourceware.org :-( >> MIME attachments have been in widespread use for a very >> long time; does your mail reader have difficulty displaying them? > > Ugh, web-based email. I keep wondering how people can write anything > but three-line mails with those. I must be getting old... There is an "It's all text" firefox plugin, which makes editing the messages with a real editor easy. Unfortunately, whitespace and line wrapping are still a problem. > Anyway, I use emacs's rmail to read my mail. Have been for years, and > for me being able to have my mail inside my editor is fairly > essential. Rmail isn't MIME-aware, which is great. I don't get to > see most of the random crap that uneducated computer users attach to > their mails. And if I really want to look at it, there's etach wich > detaches MIME attachments from my mail and saves them as a file. > > Detaching attachments is fine for most things, but it is really > annoying for reviewing patches, since in many cases you want to make > remarks about particular lines of a patch, whcih is best done in line. Surely you can open the detached attachment in another buffer and cut/paste the lines you want to comment on back into the reply? > This is the reason why we used to have the (unwritten?) rule that > patches were supposed to be sent inline using a mail client that > didn't muck with the contents of the mail message. Yes, I would very much like such a client. For a long time I've used emacs VM mode, but there are several features of Gmail which I do not know how to emulate in emacs-VM, so it isn't really feasible for me to switch back to emacs :( Base64 attachments appear not to cause too much trouble in this list (you are the only one who complained recently), although they are not tolerated in glibc lists. Cheers, -- Paul Pluzhnikov