Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 31854 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2001 19:40:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 31835 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 19:40:27 -0000 X-Passed: MX on Titatovenaar at WebWeaving.org on Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:33:47 -0700 (PDT) and masked X-No-Spam: Neither the receipients nor the senders email address(s) are to be used for Unsolicited (Commercial) Email without the explicit written consent of either party; as a per-message fee is incurred for inbound and outbound traffic to the originator. X-Curiousity: Killed the Cat X-Huis-aan-Huis-Sticker: Nee-Nee X-Authentication-Warning: titatovenaar.sfo.covalent.net: dirkx owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:33:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik X-X-Sender: To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." cc: Ryan Bloom , Subject: Re: multipart/foo rfc2046 parser to suppliment rfc822? In-Reply-To: <02ac01c1356b$f2e96780$93c0b0d0@roweclan.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > I will look at those, thank you! Notice one important bit. I am proposing we move > our parser for rfc822 headers from httpd into apr-util. And I am proposing we add > the parser to fracture a multipart/* mime type between parts (per rfc2046). Yep :-) I noticed. Could you get me the Grail as well - and any swords if you come acros any :-) But seriously - this is not nearly as simple as it should be. One could consider MIME broken for that reason. But very valuable if we could expose a (mupack?) based API in apr. That would be very, very nice - and we could certainly simplify code in the proxy, http handlingand what not. DW