[CLUE-Tech] Any one using Vaio with DSC-P50?

[Jed S. Baer]

On 28 Sep 2002 12:42:58 -0600
Ed Hill <ed at eh3.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 2002-09-28 at 11:43, Stephen Lehr wrote:
> > 
> > Your last 2 postings to this list have no text body that I can find. 
> > For what it's worth. . .
> 
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> Two reasons its probably not coming through:
> 
>   1) I'm using Evolution (http://www.ximian.com/) and am GPG-signing 
>      (http://www.gnupg.org/) most my outgoing email.  For this one 
>      email, I'm intentionally *NOT* signing it so that you'll be able 
>      to read it.
> 
>   2) Your email client and/or your email filtering is garbage. 
>      I almost never use MS products, but I've heard that both MS 
>      LookOut and certain Norton email virus-scanners will not 
>      correctly handle PGP/GPG-signed emails.  And according to 
>      your headers, you're using: 
> 
>        X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
> 
> 
> I strongly suggest that you upgrade your email client and/or examine
> your email filtering rules.  If you want, I'll be happy to send a few
> more signed emails so that you can test your upgrades/fixes.
> 
> Ed
> 
> ps - I've forwarded this to the CLUE TECH list since its certainly 
>      on-topic.  How many other folks are suffering with PGP/GPG 
>      problems due to broken email filters/scanners and/or clients?

Cool! Do we get to have a (small) email-client flame war? ;-) Sylpheed
R00lz!

Seriously though, I've always sorta wondered whether it's worth the
trouble to digitally sign all e-mails. Sylpheed supports GPG quite nicely,
and I've even generated a nifty key. Haven't come up with a reason yet.
It's sorta along the same lines as sending HTML formatted messages. I'd
request that when sending e-mail, people consider that the intent is for
it to be readable by the recipient. Sometimes that means making concession
for MUAs which might be older (features not supported). I think this is
especially true when sending to mailing lists. Not trying to pick on
anybody (at either end), just a general statement on my part.

A quick look at some e-mail envelopes shows very little difference between
content type multipart/mixed and multipart/signed. I'd guess maybe that
content type is not recognized?

later,
jed
-- 
We're frogs who are getting boiled in a pot full of single-character
morphemes, and we don't notice. - Larry Wall; Perl6, Apocalypse 5