On [2002-Jul-17] Tim Pierce twp@rootsweb.com wrote:
In article 20020716202554.GA76902@actis2.merck.com, Richard G. Ball Richard_Ball@merck.com wrote:
On [2002-Jul-16] Tim Pierce twp@rootsweb.com wrote:
So you could try forcing the issue by breaking the X-Command into these continuation lines yourself well before the 72-character limit. I don't know if SmartList/procmail will actually handle the continuation line correctly, but it seems like it ought to.
If Kevin can't turn off line-wrap he probably can't enforce headers either :-(
I understood his message to say they were already putting X-Commands in the body.
Oh. Then why did you say:
On [2002-Jul-16] Tim Pierce twp@rootsweb.com wrote:
It's supposed to be legal to break headers into multiple lines by adding whitespace at the front of each "continuation line."
[example snipped]
So you could try forcing the issue by breaking the X-Command into these continuation lines yourself well before the 72-character limit.
Which seemed to be asking Kevin to put short *header* lines into the message with whitespace to cause "continuation"?
That was why I emphasized the body-centric approach since Kevin was saying he was using x-commands in the body.
Rich