Re: Aging Dependencies?

On 7 May 2012 at 23:50, Alexander Zangerl <[email protected]>wrote: 
> On Sun, 06 May 2012 15:10:48 GMT, "Welch, Brent" writes:
> 
> > The mangle patch changes a . to a [^\n] in regexp, which seems
> > pretty good.  I gather you don't want to gobble up the whole
> > message when we're matching "BEGIN PGP MESSAGE" and that line is
> > messed up.
> 
> indeed, looks good and i'll be committing it RSN.

Nice.

> > The other patch drops a ";" from the mail headers, and I'm not
> > sure that's ok ?
> 
> that patch only applies to application/pgp (i.e. the non-mime,
> non-multipart, ancient pgp format) which hopefully nobody uses
> anymore on this side of y2k...
> 
> as far as i can tell that patch should NOT go in: the mods
> damage the already non-standard x-action/x-recipients headers
> beyond mime compliance (that ; is required), and the old cruft
> should contine using mime type application/pgp instead of the
> application/x-pgp from the patch.

I'll bet I adopted (created?) that patch back when I was using PGP, 
as you say pre y2k.  I'll pick through my email to see if I still 
have anything stored that conforms to the old way, with an eye to 
backing out the patch from my own build.

Thanks for the education....


--
Kevin