Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #3954 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Luis Denera <luisdenera@invalid.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-01-28 04:33 +0000 |
| Last post | 2012-02-02 02:59 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 94 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Luis Denera <luisdenera@invalid.net> - 2012-01-28 04:33 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? rouben@shady.(none) (Rouben Rostamian) - 2012-01-28 07:41 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-28 10:38 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Norbert Möndjen <n.moendjen@vodafone.de> - 2012-01-28 13:01 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-28 16:00 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-01-28 06:07 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-01-28 12:17 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-01-28 19:13 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-01-28 22:28 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-01-29 05:03 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-01-29 07:06 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-01-29 07:35 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-01-30 12:46 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-01-30 12:32 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-01-30 19:02 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-01-30 15:23 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-01-30 22:39 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-01-30 14:03 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2012-01-30 20:31 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-01-30 14:22 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-01-30 20:02 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-01-30 14:31 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-01-30 20:48 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-30 20:48 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2012-01-30 18:10 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-31 10:18 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-01-31 10:53 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-01-31 16:15 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Paul Bartlett <bartlett@panix.com> - 2012-01-31 17:20 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-01-31 17:27 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Laurent Claessens <moky.math@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 09:41 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Feranija <feranija@mouse-potato.com> - 2012-02-01 01:53 -0800
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 11:14 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Laurent Claessens <moky.math@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 15:11 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 09:20 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-01 09:49 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 10:58 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-01 12:48 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 13:59 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2012-02-05 16:52 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-02-05 11:04 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-05 20:23 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2012-02-05 17:09 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-05 23:40 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-06 08:41 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 10:34 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-02-06 10:48 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-06 11:04 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 12:25 +0000
Docs/Word Processing in Console - but should be changed to "Who's is bigger?" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-02-06 14:47 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - but should be changed to "Who's is bigger?" Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 15:34 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - but should be changed to "Who's is bigger?" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-02-06 16:30 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - but should be changed to "Who's is bigger?" J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-02-06 16:50 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - but should be changed to "Who's is bigger?" - is now "sig wars" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-02-06 17:01 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - but should be changed to "Who's is bigger?" - is now "sig wars" The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-02-06 17:34 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - but should be changed to "Who's is bigger?" Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 18:30 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - Now: Just tryin' to help, ma'am... gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-02-06 22:49 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - Now: Just tryin' to help, ma'am... Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-07 01:58 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - Now: Just tryin' to help, ma'am... Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-07 11:20 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console - Now: Just tryin' to help, ma'am... gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-02-07 12:17 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2012-02-06 14:15 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2012-02-06 11:16 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-06 11:29 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2012-02-06 12:45 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-06 15:02 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 13:08 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-31 01:05 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-01-31 03:25 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Chick Tower <c.tower@deadspam.com> - 2012-02-01 04:09 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2012-02-01 05:54 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? DenverD <DenverD@invalid.dk> - 2012-01-28 22:48 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? JeffM <jeffm_@email.com> - 2012-01-28 18:23 -0800
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-28 18:36 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? pH <pureheart@pacbell.net> - 2012-02-01 09:18 -0800
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2012-02-01 20:35 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-02-01 17:24 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2012-02-01 23:17 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-02-01 20:42 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Krzysztof Mitko <fakemail@krzysztof.at.eml.dot.cc> - 2012-02-02 08:01 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-02 09:02 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2012-02-02 04:29 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2012-02-01 15:24 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Feranija <feranija@mouse-potato.com> - 2012-02-04 13:20 -0800
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Aaron W. Hsu <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-02-04 18:03 -0600
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? danca <ynnadrebyc@tiscalinet.it> - 2012-02-01 19:54 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2012-02-01 15:17 -0500
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-02-01 20:58 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-01 22:21 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Feranija <feranija@mouse-potato.com> - 2012-02-01 13:18 -0800
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-01 22:27 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? danca <ynnadrebyc@tiscalinet.it> - 2012-02-02 00:58 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-02 02:58 +0100
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-02-02 01:08 +0000
Re: Docs/Word Processing in Console ? Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2012-02-02 02:59 +0100
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-30 20:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jg6t1h$bpj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4019 |
On Monday, January 30th, 2012, at 12:32:03h -0600, Robert Heller wrote: > This is an *English* newsgroup. I guess that means all the Irish, Scottish, Welsh etc will not be allowed to post then.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-30 14:31 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <JKednes-z6-MY7vSnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@posted.localnet> |
| In reply to | #4023 |
At Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:02:57 +0000 (UTC) J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> wrote:
>
> On Monday, January 30th, 2012, at 12:32:03h -0600, Robert Heller wrote:
>
> > This is an *English* newsgroup.
>
> I guess that means all the Irish, Scottish, Welsh etc
> will not be allowed to post then.
English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all
of the British Isles. *I* was just objecting to the use base64
encoding. It is *unfriendly*. I would have to add additional (and
really unnecesary) code to be newsreader. There isn't any really good
reason to use base64 encoding for *text*, unless you are making *heavy*
use of UTF-16 (eg the message is in Chinese using Chinese characters).
English (or really any language using the Roman alphabet) using either
ASCII (sufficent for English) or one of the 8-bit ASCII supersets either
needs no encoding or can use a lightweight encoding (quoted-printable,
etc.). Base64 is just plain overkill and is totally unreadably without
lots of extra processing.
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / heller@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-30 20:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jg6vnc$bpj$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4026 |
On Monday, January 30th, 2012, 14:31:13 at -0600, Robert Heller wrote: > English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all > of the British Isles. How about the term "Anglophone" then? ;) noun 1. an English-speaking person, especially a native speaker of English. adjective 2. of or pertaining to speakers of English.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-30 20:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jg6vnc$cfv$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #4026 |
On 2012-01-30, Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> wrote:
> At Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:02:57 +0000 (UTC) J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Monday, January 30th, 2012, at 12:32:03h -0600, Robert Heller wrote:
>>
>> > This is an *English* newsgroup.
>>
>> I guess that means all the Irish, Scottish, Welsh etc
>> will not be allowed to post then.
>
> English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all
> of the British Isles.
Well, here we go an another ride on _that_ merry-go-round...
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I wonder if there's
at anything GOOD on tonight?
gmail.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam <sam@email-scan.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-30 18:10 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <cone.1327968640.781815.10221.1000@monster.email-scan.com> |
| In reply to | #4026 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Robert Heller writes: > English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all > of the British Isles. *I* was just objecting to the use base64 > encoding. It is *unfriendly*. I would have to add additional (and > really unnecesary) code to be newsreader. In the year 2012, any non-prehistoric NNTP or mail client should not require any additional coding, in order to understand base64.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-31 10:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jg8f4o$pbc$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #4026 |
Robert Heller wrote: > English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all > of the British Isles. I was just objecting to the use base64 > encoding. It is *unfriendly*. Do you often take the time to rummage through post headers to find out if unfriendly options were set? > I would have to add additional (and > really unnecesary) code to be newsreader. Specifying which encoding scheme is used is not an unnecessary option. In fact, your unreasonable complain demonstrates that it is in fact not only reasonable but also required. > There isn't any really good > reason to use base64 encoding for *text*, unless you are making heavy > use of UTF-16 (eg the message is in Chinese using Chinese characters). UTF-8 is also Unicode, and the reason why it has been adopted globally to replace ASCII or ISO 8859-1 is not due to "Chinese using Chinese characters". You try to write anything in any language other than English and you will quickly understand the shortcomings of ASCII/ISO 8859-1. In fact, you don't even need to use languages other than English, as none of those encodings support the euro sign. > English (or really any language using the Roman alphabet) using either > ASCII (sufficent for English) or one of the 8-bit ASCII supersets either > needs no encoding or can use a lightweight encoding (quoted-printable, > etc.). Base64 is just plain overkill and is totally unreadably without > lots of extra processing. Again, you are showing your ignorance. UTF-8 is Unicode, it a superset of ASCII and you can use it to render any character you see fit. So, I don't really see the point of your complains. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-31 10:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <8739aw2ley.fsf@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #4037 |
Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes: > Robert Heller wrote: >> English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all >> of the British Isles. I was just objecting to the use base64 >> encoding. It is *unfriendly*. > > Do you often take the time to rummage through post headers to find out if > unfriendly options were set? I suspect he just saw a pile of hex. > Again, you are showing your ignorance. UTF-8 is Unicode, it a > superset of ASCII and you can use it to render any character you see > fit. So, I don't really see the point of your complains. He's not complaining about the use of Unicode, he's complaining about the use of base64. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-31 16:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.v8yvz1000p3ku8@localhost> |
| In reply to | #4038 |
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:53:09 -0500, Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> wrote: > I suspect he just saw a pile of hex. I believe you are right. The newsreaders which are a little old or have not had reasonable patches will not unencode the encoded text, and thus, some users will see nothing but a pile of hex. On the other hand, I know of very few, if any newsreaders that have any active users that still have this problem. I would be very interested to know what the newsreader is that caused this problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Bartlett <bartlett@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-31 17:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.NEB.2.00.1201311717260.12942@panix2.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #4043 |
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Aaron W. Hsu wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:53:09 -0500, Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> > wrote: > >> I suspect he just saw a pile of hex. > > I believe you are right. The newsreaders which are a little old or have not > had reasonable patches will not unencode the encoded text, and thus, some > users will see nothing but a pile of hex. On the other hand, I know of very > few, if any newsreaders that have any active users that still have this > problem. I would be very interested to know what the newsreader is that > caused this problem. For reading some (not all) newsgroups, I use Alpine on a netBSD system telnet'ed into from a terminal emulator. All I saw on the post under discussion was a "bunch of hex." I did not at the time think to look at the message headers. However, Alpine allows piping a message, so I suppose that if I had an appropriate filter, I could have viewed the message "plain." -- Paul Bartlett
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-01-31 17:27 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <baOdnRIN9ax05bXSnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@posted.localnet> |
| In reply to | #4043 |
At Tue, 31 Jan 2012 16:15:27 -0500 "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:53:09 -0500, Richard Kettlewell
> <rjk@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > I suspect he just saw a pile of hex.
>
> I believe you are right. The newsreaders which are a little old or have
> not had reasonable patches will not unencode the encoded text, and thus,
> some users will see nothing but a pile of hex. On the other hand, I know
> of very few, if any newsreaders that have any active users that still have
> this problem. I would be very interested to know what the newsreader is
> that caused this problem.
It is my home-grown TkNewsII mail/news program that use the QWK protocol
to transport news and mail (with the use of uqwk) between by mail server
and my home machine (or laptop). (A reasonable current version of
TkNewsII is available for download from
ftp://ftp.deepsoft.com/pub/deepwoods/Other/) I never bothered to
implement base64 since I never visit binary newsgroups, which is where
base64 would be required.
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / heller@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurent Claessens <moky.math@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 09:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <jgatrn$bu4$1@news.univ-fcomte.fr> |
| In reply to | #4043 |
Le 31/01/2012 22:15, Aaron W. Hsu a écrit : > On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:53:09 -0500, Richard Kettlewell > <rjk@greenend.org.uk> wrote: > >> I suspect he just saw a pile of hex. > > I believe you are right. The newsreaders which are a little old or have > not had reasonable patches will not unencode the encoded text, and thus, > some users will see nothing but a pile of hex. On the other hand, I know > of very few, if any newsreaders that have any active users that still have > this problem. I would be very interested to know what the newsreader is > that caused this problem. I got it with Thunderbird 3.1.16 on a Ubuntu Lucid Lynx. This is not exactly "old" ;) best Laurent
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Feranija <feranija@mouse-potato.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 01:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <jgb22r$n8m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4058 |
On 01/02/12 00:41, Laurent Claessens wrote: > Le 31/01/2012 22:15, Aaron W. Hsu a écrit : >> On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:53:09 -0500, Richard Kettlewell >> <rjk@greenend.org.uk> wrote: >> >>> I suspect he just saw a pile of hex. >> >> I believe you are right. The newsreaders which are a little old or have >> not had reasonable patches will not unencode the encoded text, and thus, >> some users will see nothing but a pile of hex. On the other hand, I know >> of very few, if any newsreaders that have any active users that still have >> this problem. I would be very interested to know what the newsreader is >> that caused this problem. > > I got it with Thunderbird 3.1.16 on a Ubuntu Lucid Lynx. This is not > exactly "old" ;) > > best > Laurent If you mean this message: https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.misc/msg/ff4845a71a621c92 I could read it in Thunderbird 3.1.17 without problems, even not noticing his encoding before someone questioned his post in base64. Thunderbird downloaded from here, and manually installed in /usr/local: ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/thunderbird/releases/ as I do in last several years, never relying on distro's FF and TB prepackaging. P.S. Ubuntu is the worst thing that could happen in world of linux.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 11:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jgb6r6$3s2$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #4061 |
Feranija wrote: > I could read it in Thunderbird 3.1.17 without problems, even not > noticing his encoding before someone questioned his post in base64. I also could read it without no major problems, and I'm using KNode 4.7.3. The only issue I've noticed was a couple of characters not being supported by the font I use. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurent Claessens <moky.math@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 15:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4F294822.6070703@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #4061 |
>> I got it with Thunderbird 3.1.16 on a Ubuntu Lucid Lynx. This is not >> exactly "old" ;) >> >> best >> Laurent > > > If you mean this message: > https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.misc/msg/ff4845a71a621c92 > [...] > P.S. Ubuntu is the worst thing that could happen in world of linux. I'd like to answer that Google is the worst thing that could happen in the world of usenet ;) Anyway, I'm not able to follow your link :p Laurent
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 09:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jgb05a$k65$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #4038 |
Richard Kettlewell wrote: > He's not complaining about the use of Unicode, he's complaining about > the use of base64. He has complained about the use of Unicode in this thread, and this post is a reply following subsequent replies to that complaint. A couple of replies down this thread, Robert Heller stated the following: <quote> > Probably the Unicode. I have Unicode in my mails. Why? This is an English newsgroup. </quote> Then, he proceeded to claim that "really any language using the roman alphabet" "either needs no encoding or can use a lightweight encoding". On another post in this thread, Robert Heller made the following claim: <quote> Right. And the odd UTF-8 in the sig can be handled with quoted-printable or something (and be ignored by people who can't/don't deal with oriental languages). The rest of the posting would essentially be in ASCII. </quote> So, he isn't really complaining about the use of base64. He is complaining about the use of any other encoding scheme beyond pure ASCII, and he is basing his claims in premises which are silly and technically wrong. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 09:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87k446zxw3.fsf@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #4059 |
Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes: > <quote> > Right. And the odd UTF-8 in the sig can be handled with > quoted-printable or something (and be ignored by people who can't/don't > deal with oriental languages). The rest of the posting would essentially > be in ASCII. > </quote> > > So, he isn't really complaining about the use of base64. He is complaining > about the use of any other encoding scheme beyond pure ASCII, and he is > basing his claims in premises which are silly and technically wrong. In the very text you quote he suggested using QP. In the message you replied to he made it completely unambiguous that he was complaining about base64, not about use of Unicode in general. You're staring the facts in the face and denying them. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 10:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jgb5t7$1q3$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #4060 |
Richard Kettlewell wrote: > In the very text you quote he suggested using QP. In the message you > replied to he made it completely unambiguous that he was complaining > about base64, not about use of Unicode in general. You're staring the > facts in the face and denying them. You claimed that "He's not complaining about the use of Unicode", which has already been shown to be false. So, before you go on accusing others of "staring the facts in the face and denying them", you should at least try to make an effort not to make that mistake yourself. And by the way, the only reason he suggested the use of quoted-printable character is to «be ingored by people who can't/don't deal with oriental languages». I don't know how anyone can agree with that nonsense. In spite of these silly statements, and to avoid wasting time with this nonsense, surely we can agree that base64 isn't suited for this stuff and that nowadays there is no good reason to avoid Unicode. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 12:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <874nvazpmm.fsf@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #4062 |
Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes: > Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> In the very text you quote he suggested using QP. In the message you >> replied to he made it completely unambiguous that he was complaining >> about base64, not about use of Unicode in general. You're staring the >> facts in the face and denying them. > > You claimed that "He's not complaining about the use of Unicode", which has > already been shown to be false. So, before you go on accusing others of > "staring the facts in the face and denying them", you should at least try to > make an effort not to make that mistake yourself. I prefer to trust his perfectly clear statement of what he's complaining about over your theory. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-01 13:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jgbgfj$s19$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #4064 |
Richard Kettlewell wrote: > I prefer to trust his perfectly clear statement of what he's complaining > about over your theory. That's what you get by letting petty spite influence your judgement. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-02-05 16:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9f14380a4951b99dfe05afdc4d29d494@remailer.privacy.at> |
| In reply to | #4038 |
Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> [RM]: RM> On another post in this thread, Robert Heller [RH] made the RM> following claim: RM> RM> RH> And the odd UTF-8 in the sig can be handled RM> RH> with quoted-printable or something (and be ignored by people who RM> RH> can't/don't deal with oriental languages). The rest of the posting RM> RH> would essentially be in ASCII. No. Non-ASCII characters (almost exclusively UTF-8 encoded unicode characters these days) are also contained in some newsreader supplied strings, like: "<poster> wrote on <date>:", according to the user's locale settings. See older news replies in this group from e.g. francophones.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web