delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin/2008/02/29/18:06:11

X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <47C88FAC.48AF5FBF@dessent.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:05:16 -0800
From: Brian Dessent <brian AT dessent DOT net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Attachment without nntp
References: <a80482d0802221032t65ce5184x50c1da849fb7dbbc AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <005c01c87584$518c6f30$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <loom DOT 20080224T135049-312 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <012c01c876f1$94f095d0$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <loom DOT 20080225T102956-902 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <003601c8779b$4af55f10$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <loom DOT 20080225T111859-263 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <47C2D268 DOT 2080300 AT cygwin DOT com> <loom DOT 20080225T151147-66 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <loom DOT 20080226T113255-808 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <loom DOT 20080229T110143-748 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <47C80546 DOT 6060005 AT byu DOT net> <slrnfsh0gu DOT tpv DOT oudeis AT isis DOT thalatta DOT eme> <47C8885E DOT 816E8BD5 AT dessent DOT net> <slrnfsh34f DOT tpv DOT oudeis AT isis DOT thalatta DOT eme>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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

Will Parsons wrote:

> I certainly don't *want* to make it inconvenient for potential responders
> - I simply thought that uuencoding was the way one "attached" using the
> nntp interface.  If doing so is an annoyance rather than a help, I
> certainly won't do it in the future.  What then is the recommendation -
> include it because it's better than no cygcheck output at all, or don't
> bother?

I'd say that including the cygcheck output inline is better than
uuencoding it, even though that tends to be frowned up as it gives lots
of false positives to future archive searchers.  But that's just MHO.

> I'm not sure what a pastebin-like site is, but would it really be more

http://pastebin.com/

> convenient for someone to go to a web site to retrieve output than to
> uudecode the mail?  (I don't know about the mail reader you use, but
> for me, uudecoding is a couple of keystrokes in slrn - no manual copying
> and pasting required.)

It's most definitely easier for me to click on a URL than to save a
message to a file, switch to a prompt, cd to the directory where I saved
it, fire up an editor, remove the non-uue parts, figure out if I even
have the uudecode program installed, realize that I don't, go install
one, pipe it through uudecode, then finally view the file.  It's easy
for you in slrn because that's a newsreader, and uuencoded content in
newsgroups are common.  I don't use a newsreader, I use an email client
and uuencoded content in email is fairly rare.

Brian

--
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 -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019