Julian Andres Klode writes:
>> What Thomas Found out was that the exact same email with
>>
>> Message-Id/From/Date/Subject/To
>>
>> (in that order) does not work, but
>>
>> Date/From/Subject/To/Message-Id
>>
>> does work. Weird and "wonderful". But there might be a lot of other
>> ord
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 09:59:25AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 9:47 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> > Linus Torvalds writes:
> >
> > > While it's true that header ordering isn't specified, there's a common
> > > "canonical" order that the headers are listed in. To quote
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 9:47 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> Linus Torvalds writes:
>
> > While it's true that header ordering isn't specified, there's a common
> > "canonical" order that the headers are listed in. To quote rfc822:
> > ...
> > body must occur AFTER the headers. It i
Linus Torvalds writes:
> While it's true that header ordering isn't specified, there's a common
> "canonical" order that the headers are listed in. To quote rfc822:
> ...
> body must occur AFTER the headers. It is recommended
> that, if present, headers be sent in
So Thomas Gleixner just figured out that the google gmail support for
S/MIME is even more broken than we initially thought, and has been
rejecting emails that have a non-canonical order of headers in the
email. In particular, gmail s/mime parsing hates emails generated with
"git format-patch --thre
5 matches
Mail list logo
