Re: [Nmh-workers] whatnow: can't attach because no header field name was given.

[Jon Steinhart]

>The only portion of the one I have here that seems at all relevant is
>this:
>
>       For file names with dot suffixes, the context is scanned for a
>       mhshow-suffix- entry for that suffix.  The content-type for
>       the part is taken from that context entry if a match is found.
>       If no match is found or the file does not have a dot suffix,
>       the content-type is text/plain if the file contains only ASCII
>       characters or application/octet-stream if it contains characters
>       outside of the ASCII range.

Yeah, that's the exact bit.  But like I said, it's rather short and
should contain a reference to mhshow.

>I am reading this and immediately asking myself: "Context?  What
>context?"

Now that I read that ... context is probably the wrong term (the nmh context
has stuff in it like the current message, folder, etc).  mh-profile(5)
explains that in greater detail, but in this case it should be "profile".

Anyway ... check out the man page for mhshow.  And also mhn.defaults has
an example.

>Anyway, even setting that issue aside for a moment, I'm still not seeing
>anything in this man page that tells me where to go or what to do if I'd
>like NHM to Do The Right Thing for various possible attachment types.
>Could you please elaborate for my edification?  If it is easily possible
>to make this work right, then I'd like to take a whack at it.

Sure.  Here's a sample line I used in my .mh_profile that I just
tested right now with the attach command; it did exactly what it was
supposed to do.

mhshow-suffix-application/pdf: .pdf

--Ken

Ah, I didn't understand the thread correctly.  Yes, it should be profile
and not context.  My mistake, although it lasted for years :)

And yes, having defaults for common content types in the profile would
be a good thing.  At the time that I wrote this stuff suffixes were not
nearly as standardized as they are today.

Jon