- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] Killer Apps Image.

by Keith Wright

> From: Aaron Haviland <orion(a)tribble.dyndns.org> > X-Ads: Reach my targeted audience. Buy this header today. > X-Go-Away: or I shall taunt you a second time! > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Frank Sweetser said: > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 02:22:07AM -0500, Aaron Haviland wrote: > > > ...or he could just configure it properly :-) > >=20 > > It is configured properly, IMO. =20 > >=20 > > - Aside from the whole "email is TEXT goddamnit" argument (which I happe= > n to > > i'm not saying that html emails are right. i hate 'em as much as > everyone else. No, you don't. You send Mime quoted-printable. We curmudgeons would never do that. Ascii is the _American_ Standard Code for Information Interchange. True patriots will reject subversive substitutes. > i just figure i may as well be able to view them. without having > to complain about it. the ones that aren't spam, at least... But there aren't any! I read mail with Emacs and anything that's HTML gets the middle finger without more than 200 milliseconds of reflex lag. (Middle finger is for D(elete).) I have a few clueless friends who send multipart/alternative with the same message in Ascii and HTML, but if it's pure HTML, it's crap. Don't tell the Spammers, because it will slow down the sorting if they start spamming in plain text, but don't send HTML to me, I may never see it. The message that started this thread may be the first time in my life I've seen HTML email that wasn't obvious unquestionable spam. If I were ambitious about procmail filtering I would not hesitate to automate the trashing of it. -- -- Keith Wright <kwright(a)free-comp-shop.com> Programmer in Chief, Free Computer Shop <http://www.free-comp-shop.com> --- Food, Shelter, Source code. ---

Feb. 14, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Newbie Answer.

by Andy Stewart

On Wednesday 13 February 2002 01:36 am, Gregory Avedissian wrote: > Aaron Haviland wrote: > > I'd definitely recommend -t vfat over -t msdos, and /etc/fstab over > > /etc/rc* > > As it turns out, I couldn't find rc.local, so I went with /etc/fstab. > SuSE was already calling my dos and windows partitions 'vfat' so I > didn't see any reason to argue with it. It worked the first time, too. I agree that /etc/fstab is the right place to do this sort of thing, and I'm glad to hear that you got it to work the first time. Who ever said that Linux was hard?! FYI: regarding the reference to a file called rc.local. On a SuSE system, it is called /etc/rc.d/rc and one shouldn't muck with it unless one really knows what is going on. It is part of a set of programs called "init scripts" which get executed when booting or shuting down the computer. Later, Andy -- Andy Stewart Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA, USA http://www.wlug.org

Feb. 14, 2002

web bugs

by Charles R. Anderson

I made a reference to "web bugs" in a previous email. Those of you who use HTML mail readers may be interested in this: http://www.privacyfoundation.org/resources/webbug.asp -- Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/ PGP Key ID: 49BB5886 Fingerprint: EBA3 A106 7C93 FA07 8E15 3AC2 C367 A0F9 49BB 5886

Feb. 13, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Killer Apps Image.

by Aaron Haviland

Frank Sweetser said: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 02:22:07AM -0500, Aaron Haviland wrote: > > ...or he could just configure it properly :-) > > It is configured properly, IMO. > > - Aside from the whole "email is TEXT goddamnit" argument (which I happen to > agree with) have you seen some of the sludge that some of these mailreaders > generate and label as HTML? > > - If the sender's email app is set up properly, even if it is sending an HTML > version it should at least have the courtesy to include a plain text version > as well. > > - I read my email through a web frontend ocasionally. I have it configured > to only read the text portion of the message, because I'm usually using > it from something other than my own machine, so I have no idea if it even > has basic security precautions against HTML viruses/trojans/etc in > place. my web frontend consists of mindterm and ssh and mutt. i'm not saying that html emails are right. i hate 'em as much as everyone else. i just figure i may as well be able to view them. without having to complain about it. the ones that aren't spam, at least... -- Aaron Haviland orion [at] tribble [dot] dyndns [dot] org orion [at] parsed [dot] net there is no escape from the kingdom of the mole people. except that

Feb. 13, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Killer Apps Image.

by Wesley Allen

Chalk the "html e-mail > nose ring" analogy up in the "strange but accurate" column! Wes doug waud wrote: >Hi > >I agree with the back to basics group. > >Just because a new fad exists, does not mean one should >adopt it. Witness, for example, nose-rings (or pick your >favorite anatomical location). > >Another analogy: just because you can pull out a plug >does not mean that is a good idea. > >And one more. Just because you can wash CD's does not >mean that is what you should do. > >Oh am I having fun! > >doug >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

Feb. 13, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Killer Apps Image.

by doug waud

Hi I agree with the back to basics group. Just because a new fad exists, does not mean one should adopt it. Witness, for example, nose-rings (or pick your favorite anatomical location). Another analogy: just because you can pull out a plug does not mean that is a good idea. And one more. Just because you can wash CD's does not mean that is what you should do. Oh am I having fun! doug

Feb. 13, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Killer Apps Image.

by Theo Van Dinter

On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 08:50:57AM -0500, Frank Sweetser wrote: > - Aside from the whole "email is TEXT goddamnit" argument (which I happen to > agree with) have you seen some of the sludge that some of these mailreaders > generate and label as HTML? Here here! I used to just bounce HTML-only messages with a "polite" note explaining that the sender's mail program was misconfigured, and I left the text/html alternate mails (the "proper" way to send HTML email) alone. Then I found a script from Randal Schwartz which filters the alternate mails and strips out the HTML section. So I still can read the message, but my system doesn't have to bother storing that HTML section that I won't be using. I then changed my bounce procmail recipe to use a new script I wrote (based on Randal's code) that replaces the HTML-only email contents with a text-ified version spit out of lynx. If you're interested in these scripts (and some tips on filtering out spam...,) you can find it all at: http://www.kluge.net/mailfiltering/ :) -- Randomly Generated Tagline: Fact: There are n+1 zucchinis in the universe.

Feb. 13, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Killer Apps Image.

by Charles R. Anderson

On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:59:30AM -0500, Andy Stewart wrote: andystewart> ...or Chuck has to get a modern e-mail tool....... :-) Over my dead webserver :) Ever hear of web-bugs? -- Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/ PGP Key ID: 49BB5886 Fingerprint: EBA3 A106 7C93 FA07 8E15 3AC2 C367 A0F9 49BB 5886

Feb. 13, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Killer Apps Image.

by Doug Chamberlin

At 02/13/2002 08:50 AM (Wednesday), Frank Sweetser wrote: >On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 02:22:07AM -0500, Aaron Haviland wrote: > > ...or he could just configure it properly :-) > >It is configured properly, IMO. I agree. Stick to plain text, please!

Feb. 13, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Killer Apps Image.

by Frank Sweetser

On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 02:22:07AM -0500, Aaron Haviland wrote: > ...or he could just configure it properly :-) It is configured properly, IMO. - Aside from the whole "email is TEXT goddamnit" argument (which I happen to agree with) have you seen some of the sludge that some of these mailreaders generate and label as HTML? - If the sender's email app is set up properly, even if it is sending an HTML version it should at least have the courtesy to include a plain text version as well. - I read my email through a web frontend ocasionally. I have it configured to only read the text portion of the message, because I'm usually using it from something other than my own machine, so I have no idea if it even has basic security precautions against HTML viruses/trojans/etc in place. - Going text -> HTML increases bandwidth needed (by 3 or 4 times with some of the "let's explicitly wrap everything in every tag we can think of" jobs I've seen - there's a reason the program to beautify FP output is called demoroniser), but rarely adds little additional content. Why waste bandwidth? -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu, fs at suave.net | $ x 16 Full-time WPI Network Tech, Part time Linux/Perl guy | I went to the eye doctor and found out I needed glasses for reading. So, I got some flip-up contact lenses. -- Stephen Wright

Feb. 13, 2002