Re: [Quilt-dev] quilt mail format

[Rtp]

Andreas Grünbacher <address@hidden> writes:

Hi,

> Hi Arnaud,
>
> 2017-11-29 12:33 GMT+01:00 Arnaud Patard <address@hidden>:
>> Greg KH <address@hidden> writes:
>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:47:22AM +0100, Arnaud Patard wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I'm using quilt to send patches. My work flow is more or less:
>> >> - hack on dev box with quilt
>> >> - create mbox file with quilt mail --mbox ....
>> >> - copy the mail on a system which is able to send mails and send it
>> >> with:
>> >>   formail -s /usr/lib/sendmail -odi -t < .mbox
>> >>
>> >> While it's working, every now and then, I'm getting some complains like:
>> >>
>> >> submit the patch using the kernel guidelines (not as an attachment, but 
>> >> in the main body text-only)
>
> where are those complaints coming from?
>

>From other kernel developers. Not some kind of automated tools.

>> >> Are there some steps I miss in order to not get theses complains and
>> >> keep my workflow ?
>> >
>> > Sounds like a problem with your version of sendmail, quilt doesn't
>> > create anything as an "attachment".  Or are you putting headers you
>> > don't mean to in the body of the changelog area?
>>
>> Not that I know of. For reference, one example of  mbox file produced by
>> quilt is https://www.rtp-net.org/misc/soc-meson-fix-ids.mbox.
>> The headers don't seem to be different when I look at the mail archive
>> http://archive.armlinux.org.uk/lurker/mbox/20171129.093001.24ab394b.rfc822
>>
>>
>> > I use quilt mail every week for the stable kernel patch review process
>> > with no problems, so I kind of doubt it is a quilt problem.
>>
>> I know and that's why I sent a mail. Given that people are using it and
>> get no complain, I may be doing something wrong but I fail to find what.
>
> It could be that some user agents are confused about the Content-Disposition
> headers. These headers encode the filenames in the original patch queue;
> when saving messages to files, some user agents will use those filenames
> as hints. The headers have no other purpose, and could be removed.

>From the headers of the reply, the user agent we're talking of is
thunderbird. I'll remove manually the Content-Disposition: line from
the mbox file before sending again and see what's happening. Thanks for
the hint.

Thanks,
Arnaud