Re: octet-stream attachment

Sounds like the original file had the extension jpg_ so the attachment didn't get labeled as image/jpeg instead it got the general application/octet-stream.

I've just tried this (with gif rather than jpg because that's what I had to hand) and I see the same behaviour. If the sending computer knows that files with extension jpg_ are image files then it should work (I've not tried this).

I reckon hypermail did the right thing - it has to rely on labeling of the mime parts done by the MUA - adding rules into hypermail to say that anything with an extension of the form jpg* is an image file is probably doable but doesn't feel like the right thing to me.

Paul

On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Tom von Alten wrote:

> Dear all:
>
> In testing v2a23, we received a message from someone using Lotus Notes as a
> MTA and/or MUA. There was a JPEG file attached, and when I viewed it with
> my MUA (Outlook98), it was properly decoded, and I was able to launch my
> image viewer to see it.
>
> However, in the archive, it was an "application/octet-stream attachment"
> and given a name ending in ".jpg_" My browser shows this as something less
> interesting than an image.
>
> With the particular settings for this archive, it should have been brought
> in-line, actually.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have the original message to see exactly what it
> looked like - presumably the JPEG attachment *was* encoded as an octet
> stream. (Different than base64, I presume?)
>
> My question is: should hypermail have been able to process this?
>
> I will try to preserve another sample message before it's processed into
> the archive, but maybe someone can recognize the issue from these clues.
>
> Thanks,
> _____________ Hewlett-Packard Computer Peripherals Bristol
> Tom von Alten mailto:Tom_vonAlten_at_boi.hp.com
>
> This posting is for informational purposes only.
> It is not a statement of the Hewlett-Packard Co.
>
>
Received on Wed 21 Jul 1999 11:11:05 AM GMT