Version: 1.5 (using KDE KDE 3.1) Installed from: Compiled From Sources OS: Linux Kmail does not support uuencoded attachments. I deal with automatic sending system which is creating emails with uuencoded attachments. I cannot affect the developers of this system. I need to switch every time to mozilla-mail in order to save these attachments.
I guess this should be a bug report. Can you provide a message showing this behaviour?
I have the same thing here. I understand the talk about how nobody should be sending this kind of email. However, it happens! A lot!
Subject: Re: support for uuencoded attachments doesn't work Please attach a message with such an attachment to this bug report.
Even Mozilla has serial problems when forwarding uuencoded attachments (mozilla handles it as normal text).
I am not sure if it was correct to move this report from 'whishlist' to 'bug'. IMhO this is a missing feature - but not a bug. Karl-Heinz
Created attachment 1635 [details] an uuencoded attachment
I don't think, uuencoded are more common to multipart mails. So better move it back to wishlist.
I'm sorry I can't agree with that. In your world (and I don't mean that in a bad way, it's a better world than the Windows world I have to survive in), people don't use Outlook to send email, and probably every other mailer on this planet also knows how to do the standard multipart email thing (I remember Netscape Communicator did it since it got released to the open public - which was back in what, 97?). Unfortunately, Outlook 2002 still uuencodes attachments. *That's* why I stress so much on this stupid issue. So, *please* get it off the wishlist and put it whereever urgently missing features go. Kopete does msn, koffice does word/excel/powerpoint, and konqueror does smb. Why is kmail doing Outlook an unimportant item for the wishlist? Don't feel flamed but I don't get it. Michael PS: The KDE version for this item can be increased to 3.1.3.
Write an e-mail to one of your Outlook friends and "accidentally" put the word begin in the beginning of a line and watch it choke trying to decode an uuencoded attachment that is not there. This report asks for a missing feature, so it's a wishlist. It's not a bug because it's never been implemented. So it's already in the right place. PS: the version in the report is that of the KMail version, not KDE's.
*** Bug 61941 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I will have a lot of fun trying that out ;-) Throw it on the wishlist if you have to. I just hope there is a way to classify wishes from "would be cool" up to "would create compatibility with xyz". PS: I didn't expect it to be a problem to extrapolate from KMail 1.5 / KDE 3.1 to KDE 3.1.3 / KMail 1.5.3. To change the direction of this discussion a little bit: How hard would it be in KMail to add parsing the ASCII part of an email for uuencoded stuff and feed that into the attachment handling? Michael
Subject: Re: support for uuencoded attachments doesn't work On Monday 29 September 2003 15:10, Wolf-Michael Bolle wrote: <snip> > To change the direction of this discussion a little bit: How hard > would it be in KMail to add parsing the ASCII part of an email for > uuencoded stuff and feed that into the attachment handling? <snip> Hacking it in? Probably easy. Doing it right? Very hard. Comparable to PGP clearsigning and that one is already ubiquitous in KMail. Look how many files #include <kpgp. h>... There is a reason why uuencode and clearsigning are both deprecated: Combining such things is combinatorically infeasible. Outlook can be configured to not send uuencoded mail, or at least send them as MIME attachments with Content-Transfer-Encoding: x-uuencode, which we support for reading. You can extract the attachments from uuencode-mails by piping them trough a script that calls uudecode and writes the results to a attachment-dump directory with a constructed name. Search the kmail@kde.org archives. Or use KNode. This feature has _very_ low priority, and a steadily decreasing one, too, as uuencoded mails get more and more uncommon. My personal barrier for patch-acceptance is very high with this one. You'd need to design, write and refactor quite a bit of code to provide generic hooks for abstracting the various just-do-it-inline methods, such as PGP clearsigning, inline uu-, yenc- and base64 encoded "attachments", geek codes, etc. But _if_ you've invested that much energy into it, rest assured that I'll help you get it polished for inclusion. Marc
*** This bug has been confirmed by popular vote. ***
Just a "me too" note. Apparently some versions of outlook express are set by default to send out uuencoded "attachments", and the persons operating these MUA can't be bothered to change their setup. Currently, when one specific client is emailing me, I have to go to mozilla mail (which otherwise I don't touch). This bug is also related to closed tickets Bug 6402 (that's an old one :-), Bug 36761 and Bug 115081 which is rather new and talks about x-uue encoded MIMA parts which I never encountered but comment #12 above mentions that it should work, but said ticket claims otherwise and was closed WONTFIX.
*** Bug 158583 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Created attachment 37278 [details] Simple uuencoded email Here's a very simple testcase: a hand-written multipart mail with a uuencoded attachment. When I open the (text/plain) attachment, I see the uuencoded text, rather than the original. My travel agent is sending me invoices as uuencoded PDF attachments (naturally, okular chokes on the uuencoded data). Looks like their automated invoicing software is using uuencode.
Thank you for your feature request. Kmail1 is currently unmaintained so we are closing all wishes. Please feel free to reopen a feature request for Kmail2 if it has not already been implemented. Thank you for your understanding.
Instead of creating a new feature request, please confirm here if the wishlist is still valid for kmail2.
not needed by me I think, this is a basic feature for an email client. but again, I'm not using kmail anymore, so not needed by me thx --- Jiri Navratil 19. 8. 2012 v 3:04, Luigi Toscano <luigi.toscano@tiscali.it>: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55898 > > Luigi Toscano <luigi.toscano@tiscali.it> changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |luigi.toscano@tiscali.it > Resolution|UNMAINTAINED |WAITINGFORINFO > > --- Comment #18 from Luigi Toscano <luigi.toscano@tiscali.it> --- > Instead of creating a new feature request, please confirm here if the wishlist > is still valid for kmail2. > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You voted for the bug.
UUencode is getting less and less prevalent. However, this is still valid for kmail2, component UI. Maybe kmail2's code is more modular, so this can be plugged in easily.
Sorry, component "general", as there are so few components available in kmail2. And, I'd say: Low importance.