X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From:	mwoehlke <mwoehlke AT tibco DOT com>
Subject:	Re: cygwin 1.5.21-2: ssh-add unable to connect to ssh-agent with McAfee installed
Date:	Wed, 11 Oct 2006 12:56:43 -0500
Lines:	31
Message-ID:	<egjb8s$ovp$1@sea.gmane.org>
References:	<452D1E8F DOT 4090908 AT cdvinc DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.7) Gecko/20060909 Thunderbird/1.5.0.7 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0
In-Reply-To:	<452D1E8F.4090908@cdvinc.com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Tim Beuman wrote:
> Matthew,
> 
> There is a line "Content-Disposition: inline" which causes the 
> attachments to be shown inline. Could be the file-type that causes 
> Thunderbird to add this line to the section header. I will check if I 
> can convince Thunderbird to not include this line when sending .txt files.

Hmm, yup, I bet that's it. See (1) for another example (note: I am also 
using Thunderbird). So, perhaps the question is why Jason complained in 
the first place, since this seems to be archive policy (and no one has 
complained at *me* for doing the same thing). Probably just overlooking 
"that's how the archiver works". :-)

If you want to turn off "Content-Disposition: inline", that should be 
fine, but my impression is that some people prefer that to having to 
open attachments. :-) Maybe it would just be better if the archiver did 
like Thunderbird does and add an '<hr>' or something to delineate 
attachments from actual inline content (and I wonder, do these things 
then show up when you search the archives?).

Would be nice if one of the big names would make an intelligible (2) 
comment on this.

(1) http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2006-09/msg00177.html
(2) http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2006-10/msg00410.html <-- not 
intelligible ;-)

-- 
Matthew
Will your shell have salvation? Only if it's Bourne Again.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -