Re: [RFC][PATCH] update SubmittingPatches to clarify attachment policy

[Bodo Eggert <harvested.in.lkml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 5/4/05, Dave Hansen <haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> I think the general opinion of posting patches as attachments
>> has changed over the last few years.  Mailers have been getting
>> a lot better at handling them, even quoting non-message-body
>> plain/text attachments in replies.
> 
> What, Linus updated his pine?????

Pine is usurally better for handling patches than other mailers.
In pine, you can save a message into a mbox using very few keystrokes,
and if the patches are not encoded, patch can parse them from there.



BTW: I wrote a tool for handling MIME mails. Originally it was intended to
catch spam in procmail, but it can safe the individual parts into seperate
files, too. Maybe this is usefull:

http://7eggert.dyndns.org/~7eggert/hp/l/spam+mail/mime-analyzer/

(You'd use "cd $destdir && formail < $mbox -s mail-analyzer -copy_all -")
-- 
According to my calculations the problem doesn't exist. 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/