(O/T) human readability (was Re: Urgent: MailScanner apparently stopped processing...)

Mariano Absatz mailscanner at LISTS.COM.AR
Fri May 9 20:33:46 IST 2003

El 9 May 2003 a las 17:13, Julian Field escribió:

> At 08:01 09/05/2003, you wrote:
> >On Fri, 9 May 2003, Julian Field wrote:
> >
> >  I checked and the message looks pretty mangled... but
> >then again I'm not sure how readable the files in that format are supposed
> >to be.
> The Postfix format is not meant to be human-readable. I know what it's
> supposed to look like.
Postfix queue files are binary?
I might get flamed for this but, WHY???
How much bandwidth/diskspace/whatever do they save by not making it human 
I might get flamed for this, but I think all protocols and file formats 
should be human-readable (not counting cryptography) "just in case"... just 
in case there is a bug, just in case the application broke, just in case you 
don't _have_ the application, whatever...
Just my 2c.

Mariano Absatz
El Baby
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it
correct, not tried it.
               -- Donald Knuth

More information about the MailScanner mailing list