From owner-ctm-users@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 21 01:55:34 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ctm-users@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F7DC106566B for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 01:55:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from tower.berklix.org (tower.berklix.org [83.236.223.114]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 105AC8FC0A for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 01:55:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from park.js.berklix.net (p549A68F8.dip.t-dialin.net [84.154.104.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by tower.berklix.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o0L1tVFK047001; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 01:55:32 GMT (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (fire.js.berklix.net [192.168.91.41]) by park.js.berklix.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o0L1tPbw043072; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 02:55:25 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fire.js.berklix.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0L1t4eI098170; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 02:55:10 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jhs@fire.js.berklix.net) Message-Id: <201001210155.o0L1t4eI098170@fire.js.berklix.net> To: Stephen McKay From: "Julian H. Stacey" Organization: http://www.berklix.com BSD Unix Linux Consultancy, Munich Germany User-agent: EXMH on FreeBSD http://www.berklix.com/free/ X-URL: http://www.berklix.com In-reply-to: Your message "Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:09:13 +1000." <201001210109.o0L19DpZ007399@dungeon.home> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 02:55:04 +0100 Sender: jhs@berklix.com Cc: ctm-users@freebsd.org, Andre Albsmeier Subject: Re: No deltas via email anymore? X-BeenThere: ctm-users@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CTM User discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 01:55:34 -0000 Stephen McKay wrote: > On Thursday, 21st January 2010, "Julian H. Stacey" wrote: > > >Reason I imagined it would bet better with an option on send, > >& auto detect on receive: > > > > There's perhaps people out there running CTM to distribute stuff > > other than FreeBSD source (other *BSD src, other data, some binary > > systems may have limited or no access to upgrade binaries except > > at release upgrade. > > > > Such users might not be on this list, as this list is more for > > the FreeBSD patches than the programs as such. So ideally a CTM > > would have a format rev. no, & receivers would first be updated > > to dual capable auto detect of old & new format, then later senders > > would reduce length of CTM lines sent. > > ctm_rmail already works with any line length that is a multiple of 4. > A change to 72 characters per line in ctm_smail does not require anyone > to update ctm_rmail. We should just do it. It's safe. Nice. > In principle a revision number is a good thing for every file and > transport format, but at this late stage I doubt any benefit would > be gained by adding one to the ctm email format. OK. Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: > This looks very easy to implement, namely change the line > #define LINE_LENGTH 76 > in /usr/src/usr.sbin/ctm/ctm_smail > > So, would there be a problem with making this start right now? > > (Remember I make the detlas, so I can make this happen anytime.) Sounds like you'd be safe to try it then :-) /usr/src/usr.sbin/ctm/ctm_smail/ctm_smail.c #define LINE_LENGTH 72 Should solve Andre's chopped sample he posted that folded after 75. [Speaking as one end consumer], I'd be happy if you tried. Andre may also need to get get his admins to turn off their conversion to "quoted printable... Or If he can't, I think there's a way in sendmail on local receive to convert "quoted printable" back to straight 8 bit ?, (I've been meaning to find time to look as I get "quoted printable" text mail from MS using friends that's a pain to edit with vi). Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey: BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Mail plain text not quoted-printable, HTML or Base64 http://www.asciiribbon.org