After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 522784 - Content-disposition for signatures and HTML E-mails with images
Content-disposition for signatures and HTML E-mails with images
Status: RESOLVED NOTABUG
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
2.22.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal major
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
evolution[composer] evolution[signatu...
Depends on:
Blocks: 473198
 
 
Reported: 2008-03-16 16:04 UTC by Philip Van Hoof
Modified: 2009-08-05 20:51 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Philip Van Hoof 2008-03-16 16:04:27 UTC
When you add an image to your HTML signature, it'll make the
content-disposition "attachment" and it'll set the filename header.

Both actions are incorrect: the content-disposition is inline and
there's no need to set the filename header. Both will make E-mail
clients like Outlook, but also Evolution itself, think that the E-mail
contains an attachment (a file attachment).

I have seen Evolution do this wrong for all kinds of inline embedded
images, whenever you insert this into your HTML document. This is
incorrect behaviour and not conform MIME.

ps. For a free software E-mail client, I think the better option is to
go with the specifications. That Outlook gets things wrong is not a good
excuse. Although I think modern E-mail clients like Outlook are getting
this right nowadays.
Comment 1 Gilles Dartiguelongue 2008-03-17 12:54:37 UTC
tested and confirming. Note that when displaying these kind of mail as HTML (ie, not using the "prefer plain" option), evolution "hides" the attachment like it does for signatures.
Comment 2 Milan Crha 2009-08-05 20:51:26 UTC
I do not see anything wrong on this. Moreover, evolution's behaviour seems correct to me, as even with inline and unnamed attachments like

> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Type: image/jpeg
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

or

> Content-Type: image/png
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

(both with some Content-ID too) are these shown in the preview, when I have prefer-plain on. I see this as an advantage, because I have possibility to save the picture, or see it, even when I do not have the HTML part shown.

As Gilles mentioned, the "attachments" are hidden when the HTML part is shown. I'm closing this.