Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #4737 > unrolled thread

How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc

Contents

  How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Michael Bell <michael@beaverbell.co.uk> - 2012-04-03 22:39 +0100
    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-04-03 23:20 +0100
    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Martin <News03@avisoft.f9.co.uk> - 2012-04-03 23:37 +0100
      Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Michael Bell <michael@beaverbell.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 07:16 +0100
        Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Martin <News03@avisoft.f9.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 11:29 +0100
          Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Carroll <bric-nospam@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 12:44 +0100
    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-04-03 23:49 +0100
    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 05:48 +0200
    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 09:26 +0100
      Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-04 11:12 +0100
        Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 13:28 +0100
    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 09:30 +0100
      Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2012-04-04 17:19 +0100
        Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Michael Bell <michael@beaverbell.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 18:28 +0100
        Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Michael Bell <michael@beaverbell.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 18:31 +0100
          Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 18:49 +0100
            Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Michael Bell <michael@beaverbell.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 06:23 +0100
              Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 08:39 +0100
                Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Rosemary Miskin <miskin@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 19:22 +0100
            Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 10:07 +0100
              Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 10:21 +0100
                Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-05 12:19 +0100
                  Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 13:14 +0100
                    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 13:26 +0100
                      Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-05 14:01 +0100
                        Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 14:41 +0100
                        Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 15:03 +0100
                          Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-05 16:12 +0100
                            Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 17:54 +0100
                          Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 16:24 +0100
                            Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-04-05 17:33 +0100
                            Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 17:57 +0100
                          Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 17:55 +0200
                            Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 18:04 +0100
                              Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 18:51 +0100
                                Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-06 06:10 +0200
                                  Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-06 08:58 +0100
                      Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Frank de Bruijn <zuiderduin@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-06 08:23 +0200
                        Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-06 09:02 +0100
                          Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> - 2012-04-06 14:34 +0100
                            Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-06 16:14 +0100
                    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-05 13:48 +0100
                  Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 13:22 +0100
                    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-05 14:16 +0100
                      Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 14:30 +0100
                      Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 14:38 +0100
                        Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-05 16:18 +0100
                          Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 16:45 +0100
                    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 14:32 +0100
              Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 10:31 +0100
                Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 13:19 +0100
                  Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 14:10 +0100
                    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Rosemary Miskin <miskin@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 19:25 +0100
                  Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-05 14:21 +0100
                    Re: How can I find out who sent a vastly oversize e-mail? Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-05 14:40 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#4796

In article <527b9345f9bbailey@argonet.co.uk>,
   Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Can I add to this, please. I have the same setup, Hermes and Pluto,
> which mostly just works. Sometimes, I have a problem with oversize
> downloads. Hermes was configured to accept any size. However, from time
> to time files fail to download and just evaporate, after a long time
> out, or won't debatch and again evaporate.

> I've tried using Attacher but for reasons I do not understand it fails to
> resolve the problem. Baffled!

I've found it usually works, but you have to be quick before Pluto
over-writes the file. Needs a bit of fiddling too afterwards.

-- 
*To steal ideas from *one* person is plagiarism; from many, research*

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4802

In article <527b948ba8dave@davenoise.co.uk>, Dave Plowman
(News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <527b9345f9bbailey@argonet.co.uk>, Brian
>    Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> > Can I add to this, please. I have the same setup,
> > Hermes and Pluto, which mostly just works. Sometimes, I
> > have a problem with oversize downloads. Hermes was
> > configured to accept any size.

Then change it. When you are offered a dangerously large
e-mail, download it on its own, and, I would suggest, save a
copy of the raw e-mail before Pluto tries to debatch it. Not
using Hermes I cannot tell you where Hermes downloads e-mail
to, but someone here can point you in the right direction.

> > However, from time to time files fail to download and
> > just evaporate, after a long time out, or won't debatch
> > and again evaporate.

> > I've tried using Attacher but for reasons I do not
> > understand it fails to resolve the problem. Baffled!

Attacher requires either the raw e-mail, or the e-mail as
*exported* from Pluto using menu over the list of e-mails in
the box. Using the save option on the actual e-mail does not
work

> I've found it usually works, but you have to be quick
> before Pluto over-writes the file. Needs a bit of
> fiddling too afterwards.

Pluto should not be overwriting anything.

I suppose that Hermes (I do not use it) could, but it seems
highly unlikely.

When Pluto debatches, it saves the recently downloaded file
in the !Pluto.Backup.Mail1 directory, which you can access
from the icon bar menu. If necessary, you can fish the raw
e-mail out of the directory and drag it straight to
attacher.

The next time that e-mail is downloaded and debatched, Pluto
renames Mail1 as Mail2; the existing Mail2 is renamed Mail3
and do on. You can configure the number of mail (and news)
backups in IconBar->preferences_>News/Mail - I have 25 which
allows me to go back some hours if necessary.

-- 
Russell
http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk
Russell Hafter Holidays         E-mail to enquiries at our domain
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4804

> > > Can I add to this, please. I have the same setup,
> > > Hermes and Pluto, which mostly just works. Sometimes, I
> > > have a problem with oversize downloads. Hermes was
> > > configured to accept any size.

> Then change it. When you are offered a dangerously large
> e-mail,

Fine, but how do you define dangerous. There seems, at times, to be no
rational regarding size as to what will or will not download safely.

> download it on its own, and, I would suggest, save a
> copy of the raw e-mail before Pluto tries to debatch it.

Done that from time to time. Occasionally been able to extract a critical
piece of text, but the remainder has always defeated me.

> Not using Hermes I cannot tell you where Hermes downloads e-mail to, but
> someone here can point you in the right direction.

> > > However, from time to time files fail to download and
> > > just evaporate, after a long time out, or won't debatch
> > > and again evaporate.

??Any ideas why that might be??

> > > I've tried using Attacher but for reasons I do not
> > > understand it fails to resolve the problem. Baffled!

> Attacher requires either the raw e-mail, or the e-mail as
> *exported* from Pluto using menu over the list of e-mails in
> the box.

Yes, I realise that, but I have *never* been able to get Attacher to work
at all and I don't know why. Very frustrating, that!

> Using the save option on the actual e-mail does not
> work

You've missed the point, I'm afraid. From the point of being a raw e-mail,
that is external to Pluto, and then trying to debatch with Pluto some
e-mails fail that debatch process and evaporate.

For one off e-mails they are lost and gone forever. Where the sender can
be contacted a repeat send might be successful, or changing the file
format of attachments, or just not sending attachments, might work.


> > I've found it usually works, but you have to be quick
> > before Pluto over-writes the file. Needs a bit of
> > fiddling too afterwards.

Don't know what you might mean.


> Pluto should not be overwriting anything.

Don't understand!

[snip]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4807

Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> Yes, I realise that, but I have *never* been able to get Attacher to work
> at all and I don't know why. Very frustrating, that!

I haven't used Attacher for a very long time, but ISTR that the line endings
need to be in the correct format for it to work. Unfortunately I can't
recall if it requires CR-LF or just LF, but if you give it the wrong one
then nothing happens. The raw data fetched from the email server will have
CR-LF (I think, without checking) but the spool file output by Hermes just
has LF.

Alan

-- 
RISC OS - you know it makes cents

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4810

In article
<gemini.m20akk009a5dz01tw.spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk>,
   Alan Wrigley
<spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> wrote:

> Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> > Yes, I realise that, but I have *never* been able to
> > get Attacher to work at all and I don't know why. Very
> > frustrating, that!

Which version are you using? I asume that you have all the
necesary modules?

> I haven't used Attacher for a very long time, but ISTR
> that the line endings need to be in the correct format
> for it to work. Unfortunately I can't recall if it
> requires CR-LF or just LF, but if you give it the wrong
> one then nothing happens. The raw data fetched from the
> email server will have CR-LF (I think, without checking)
> but the spool file output by Hermes just has LF.

I use it not frequently, but regularly. Version 1.05, 1 Dec
2007. It has never (yet) failed to decode something.

As discussed in a number of previous threads, Pluto cannot
cope with certain Base64 encoded e-mails, because they are
non-compliant in that each line is longer than the 76
character limit that base64 encoding is supposed to use.

But Attacher has no problems with these e-mails. Each line
just ends in LF. I have never seen a CR in a downloaded raw
e-mail.

-- 
Russell
http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk
Russell Hafter Holidays         E-mail to enquiries at our domain
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4820

Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:

> But Attacher has no problems with these e-mails. Each line
> just ends in LF. I have never seen a CR in a downloaded raw
> e-mail.

The Base64 MIME format specifies CR-LF, and that's what the server sends.
The only reason you never see it is because whatever app processes the fetch
will have stripped the CR to make it RISC OS compatible.

Alan

-- 
RISC OS - you know it makes cents

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4823

> > > Yes, I realise that, but I have *never* been able to
> > > get Attacher to work at all and I don't know why. Very
> > > frustrating, that!

> Which version are you using?

1.05.

> I asume that you have all the
> necesary modules?

Yes.

> > I haven't used Attacher for a very long time, but ISTR
> > that the line endings need to be in the correct format
> > for it to work. Unfortunately I can't recall if it
> > requires CR-LF or just LF, but if you give it the wrong
> > one then nothing happens. The raw data fetched from the
> > email server will have CR-LF (I think, without checking)
> > but the spool file output by Hermes just has LF.

> I use it not frequently, but regularly. Version 1.05, 1 Dec
> 2007. It has never (yet) failed to decode something.

> As discussed in a number of previous threads,

Which I do not recall.

> Pluto cannot cope with certain Base64 encoded e-mails, because they are
> non-compliant in that each line is longer than the 76 character limit
> that base64 encoding is supposed to use.

I wouldn't know a Base64 encoded e-mail if it bit me. Are there any
particular circumstances under which they are sent, just so that I know
what I might need to say to the sender, please?

> But Attacher has no problems with these e-mails. Each line
> just ends in LF. I have never seen a CR in a downloaded raw
> e-mail.

OK, fine, but that leaves me totally baffled! 8-((

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4825

In article <527bae4a22bbailey@argonet.co.uk>,
   Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> I wouldn't know a Base64 encoded e-mail if it bit me. Are
> there any particular circumstances under which they are
> sent, just so that I know what I might need to say to the
> sender, please?

Try <5110271021see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>

When you open the e-mail, there is no text, just an apparent
HTML attachment. When you open this in NetSurf or whatever
you just see rows and rows of apparently random letters,
which is the encoded version of the HTML e-mail.

Sent out usually by commercial undertaking. Most of mine
come from P+O Ferries, but I believe that the last time they
were discussed here the offending e-mail came from the BBC.

-- 
Russell
http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk
Russell Hafter Holidays         E-mail to enquiries at our domain
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4835

> > I wouldn't know a Base64 encoded e-mail if it bit me. Are
> > there any particular circumstances under which they are
> > sent, just so that I know what I might need to say to the
> > sender, please?

> Try <5110271021see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>

> When you open the e-mail, there is no text, just an apparent
> HTML attachment. When you open this in NetSurf or whatever
> you just see rows and rows of apparently random letters,
> which is the encoded version of the HTML e-mail.

> Sent out usually by commercial undertaking. Most of mine
> come from P+O Ferries, but I believe that the last time they
> were discussed here the offending e-mail came from the BBC.

Oh, one of *them*. Got one today from Unilever in answer to my on line
query regarding one of their products. Utterly incomprehensible.

Thanks very much. I sort of understand!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4827

In article <527bae4a22bbailey@argonet.co.uk>,
   Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
[Snippy]
> I wouldn't know a Base64 encoded e-mail if it bit me. Are there any
> particular circumstances under which they are sent, just so that I know
> what I might need to say to the sender, please?

You could tell them, as I've done with a couple of companies, if they
continue to send be HTML emails as containers for Base64 encoded mails,
then I shall cease dealing with them.

The best ones are after purchasing some software, they send you the
Invoice that contains the software key to install it, but you can't open
it because the way it's constructed, so you can't install it.

And in some situations Attacher doesn't retrieve them either, they have to
be transported to a PC and opened in Thunderbird, Mess Pro or similar.

The reply from them is always...
We are sorry you are having difficulties with our postings, but this is
the standard way our accounts dept send invoices etc... Perhaps you mail
software need updating.

Serif is one case in point, the advertising and offer emails from them are
easy to open, but once you've paid the dough, they start sending the HTML
container Base 64 types.

Dave

-- 

Dave Triffid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4832

In article <527bb5b4f4dave@triffid.co.uk>,
   Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <527bae4a22bbailey@argonet.co.uk>,
>    Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> [Snippy]
> > I wouldn't know a Base64 encoded e-mail if it bit me. Are there
> > any particular circumstances under which they are sent, just so
> > that I know what I might need to say to the sender, please?

> You could tell them, as I've done with a couple of companies, if
> they continue to send be HTML emails as containers for Base64
> encoded mails, then I shall cease dealing with them.

> The best ones are after purchasing some software, they send you the
> Invoice that contains the software key to install it, but you can't
> open it because the way it's constructed, so you can't install it.

The BBC complaints dept has a brilliant system. I asked a general
question about the availability of a programme and the reply was sent
in Base64 encoded mail. I managed to decipher this eventually but sent
a formal email complaint (in plain text) about not being able to view
it. Their response came -you guessed it - in Base64 encoded mail. But
it must help their statistics concerning complaints, since this one
was not pursued for lack of time on my part.

Michael Harding
Rev. Preb. M.D. Harding   riscos@mdharding.org.uk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4836

> [Snippy]
> > I wouldn't know a Base64 encoded e-mail if it bit me. Are there any
> > particular circumstances under which they are sent, just so that I
> > know what I might need to say to the sender, please?

> You could tell them, as I've done with a couple of companies, if they
> continue to send be HTML emails as containers for Base64 encoded mails,
> then I shall cease dealing with them.

Can't reply. It's a noreply address.

> The best ones are after purchasing some software, they send you the
> Invoice that contains the software key to install it, but you can't open
> it because the way it's constructed, so you can't install it.

> And in some situations Attacher doesn't retrieve them either, they have
> to be transported to a PC and opened in Thunderbird, Mess Pro or similar.

Thanks very much Dave. That explains *that* and what you suggest is what I
usually do, but I don't like being defeated, kind of thing.

> The reply from them is always... We are sorry you are having
> difficulties with our postings, but this is the standard way our
> accounts dept send invoices etc... Perhaps you mail software need
> updating.

> Serif is one case in point, the advertising and offer emails from them
> are easy to open, but once you've paid the dough, they start sending the
> HTML container Base 64 types.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4830

On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 15:03:03 +0100, Brian Bailey 
<bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> I wouldn't know a Base64 encoded e-mail if it bit me.

Hopefully most email clients will cope, but if not, if you see rows 
and rows of text like:

DhjfushJdhEituAydhdJfdhDhjfushJdhEituAydhdJfdh 
DhjfushJdhEituAydhdJfdhDhjfushJdhEituAydhdJfdh
(not identical lines, I just cut'n'pasted this)

...then there is a good change it is base64.


> Are there any particular circumstances under which they are sent,

Idiot mail clients and trendy email clients. If you were to make a 
Venn diagram, the bit in the middle would be called "smartphones".


> just so that I know what I might need to say to the sender, please?

Nothing. My phone (do I blame SonyEricsson or Google?) appears to 
send plain text non-marked-up emails in base64 encoding. Why? No 
flippin' idea but it is annoying when there's no need for it. Hell, 
*MIME* permits adding freaky-fruity characters, so other then 
pig-headed elitism, I can't conceive of a reason to justify the use 
of base64 encoding on a text email. Oh, and it isn't a 
user-configurable option... :-/


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4837

> > I wouldn't know a Base64 encoded e-mail if it bit me.

> Hopefully most email clients will cope, but if not, if you see rows 
> and rows of text like:

> DhjfushJdhEituAydhdJfdhDhjfushJdhEituAydhdJfdh 
> DhjfushJdhEituAydhdJfdhDhjfushJdhEituAydhdJfdh
> (not identical lines, I just cut'n'pasted this)

> ...then there is a good change it is base64.


> > Are there any particular circumstances under which they are sent,

> Idiot mail clients and trendy email clients. If you were to make a 
> Venn diagram, the bit in the middle would be called "smartphones".


> > just so that I know what I might need to say to the sender, please?

> Nothing. My phone (do I blame SonyEricsson or Google?) appears to 
> send plain text non-marked-up emails in base64 encoding. Why? No 
> flippin' idea but it is annoying when there's no need for it. Hell, 
> *MIME* permits adding freaky-fruity characters, so other then 
> pig-headed elitism, I can't conceive of a reason to justify the use 
> of base64 encoding on a text email. Oh, and it isn't a 
> user-configurable option... :-/

Thanks guys. Incipient senility apart, sometimes these issues are mite too
technical for me. If you can't hit it with a 4lb lump hammer then I'm a
bit lost. 8-)


Cheers

Brian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4838

In article <527bbee74fbbailey@argonet.co.uk>,
   Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Thanks guys. Incipient senility apart, sometimes these issues are mite
> too technical for me. If you can't hit it with a 4lb lump hammer then
> I'm a bit lost. 8-)

I suggest that might be the ideal tool for sorting out the idiots who
don't know how to properly configure their email clients, to send plain
text, which everyone can read.

See sig.

-- 
Stuart Winsor

Only plain text for emails
http://www.asciiribbon.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4841

On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 18:51:26 +0100, Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> 
wrote:

> I suggest that might be the ideal tool for sorting out the idiots 
who
> don't know how to properly configure their email clients, to send 
plain
> text, which everyone can read.

Hey, take it up with Google. I don't see any reason for dumb-ass 
encoding. It makes reading messages in telnet-to-pop damn near 
impossible. Plus it would use more bandwidth for the same content. 
I'd love for my phone to send out plain text messages. It isn't an 
option I can configure, so kindly take your tool someplace else 
(oooh-errr!).

:-)

Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4843

> > I suggest that might be the ideal tool for sorting out the idiots who
> > don't know how to properly configure their email clients, to send
> > plain text, which everyone can read.

> Hey, take it up with Google. I don't see any reason for dumb-ass
> encoding. It makes reading messages in telnet-to-pop damn near
> impossible. Plus it would use more bandwidth for the same content. I'd
> love for my phone to send out plain text messages. It isn't an option I
> can configure, so kindly take your tool someplace else (oooh-errr!).

> :-)

Well, thanks for that, it restores a degree of confidence. A certain
element of paranoia creeps in, like 'why can't understand this idiot
stuff'.

8-)

Regards

Brian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4842

In article <gemini.m20akk009a5dz01tw.spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk>,
   Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> wrote:
> Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> > Yes, I realise that, but I have *never* been able to get Attacher to
> > work at all and I don't know why. Very frustrating, that!

> I haven't used Attacher for a very long time, but ISTR that the line
> endings need to be in the correct format for it to work.

For a base64 blob to be handled by Attacher, it needs to contain line
feeds, with or without carriage returns. If there are no line feeds at
all within 1000 bytes of base64 - and I have seen junk like that in
e-mail - Attacher will fail. It also needs to see a preceding
Content-Type and Content-Transfer-Encoding header, separated from the
actual base64 by at least one empty line.

Regards,
Frank

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4844

> > > Yes, I realise that, but I have *never* been able to get Attacher to
> > > work at all and I don't know why. Very frustrating, that!

> > I haven't used Attacher for a very long time, but ISTR that the line
> > endings need to be in the correct format for it to work.

> For a base64 blob to be handled by Attacher, it needs to contain line
> feeds, with or without carriage returns. If there are no line feeds at
> all within 1000 bytes of base64 - and I have seen junk like that in
> e-mail - Attacher will fail.

I think that's what I have been seeing!

> It also needs to see a preceding Content-Type and
> Content-Transfer-Encoding header, separated from the actual base64 by at
> least one empty line.

Great, Frank, I will watch out for that in future. Thanks.

Regards

Brian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4845

Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> Great, Frank, I will watch out for that in future. Thanks.

Ages ago I wrote two simple utilities for manipulating either 

a) attachments dragged out of Pluto, on their way to Attacher, or

b) emails exported from Pluto, on their way to Attacher.


The first utility makes copies of dragged-out attachments prefacing them
with dummy base64 headers so that the altered file can be processed properly
by Attacher.

The other utility was written because the base64-encoded lines inside an
email are meant to be no more than 76 characters long, but sometimes were. 
It reads through the exported email to find the encoded attachment then
reads the possibly bad-length encoded lines and creates a new file
containing dummy base64 headers followed by correct-length lines.

Either or both of these may be useful to you.  They were written for RO 3.70
and require the dragged-out attachment or exported file to be given a name
or 10 or fewer characters in length.

There's instructions and sample files with which you can play with the
utilities in the zip, which is at:

 http://www.wingsandbeaks.org.uk/AttFix.zip

I do not know if they still work.

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to newsreplyaaa@wingsandbeaks.org.uk replacing "aaa" by "284".  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.acorn.misc

csiph-web