From xemacs-m  Fri Apr 11 16:01:39 1997
Received: from master.control.att.com ([135.205.52.13])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA12512
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 16:01:38 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from i.control.att.com by master.control.att.com with esmtp
	(Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0wFnRM-002ixDC; Fri, 11 Apr 97 17:01 EDT
Received: by i.control.att.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #1)
	id m0wFnRL-000mUTC; Fri, 11 Apr 97 17:00 EDT
Message-Id: <m0wFnRL-000mUTC@i.control.att.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 97 17:00 EDT
From: Larry Auton <lda@control.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: bug-vm@uunet.uu.net, xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Unsupported MIME version ?
In-Reply-To: <QQckvu05690.199704111938@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
References: <m0wFlFy-000mUTC@i.control.att.com>
	<QQckvr04971.199704111854@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
	<m0wFm27-000mUTC@i.control.att.com>
	<QQckvu05690.199704111938@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
X-Mailer: VM 6.24 under 20.1 XEmacs Lucid (beta14)

Kyle Jones writes:
> Larry Auton writes:
>  > Kyle Jones writes:
>  > > Larry Auton writes:
>  > >  > Several of the messages that I've received from xemacs-beta contain
>  > >  > headers that look like this:
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI MIME-Edit 0.75)
>  > >  >  boundary="Multipart_Mon_Apr__7_14:04:13_1997-1"
>  > > 
>  > > Solaris MTA bug (burn in hell, burn in hell).  I think I've seen
>  > > enough of these reports to just default vm-mime-ignore-mime-version
>  > > to t in 6.25.
>  > 
>  > I (setq vm-mime-ignore-mime-version t) and sure enough it works,
>  > but if it's such a common problem why not retain the "sanity check"
>  > and fix the parsing of the Mime-Version header?
> 
> The parsing isn't in error, the header is malformed.

perhaps using the word "fix" was ill considered.
please let me try again:

 if it's such a common problem why not retain the "sanity check"
 and modify the parsing of the Mime-Version header to glean the
 useful version information from the malformed headers?

-lda

P.S> I don't want to be a pain in the neck.  I'll shut up about this now.

