IMP treats this as an UTF-8 message when replying to it

IMP (HEAD20040915) will properly display this, but when I

Thu, 16 Sep 2004 09:53:14 +0000

IMP (HEAD20040915) will properly display this, but when I choose to reply to it, it treats the original message as UTF-8, and garbles the quote. Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) To: Joaquim Homrighausen Message-Id: <73FDD2F5-07BD-11D9-9DEE-000A95716D0A@doe.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-18-1053309099 From: john@doe.com Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?lite_p=E5_v=E4g_in....?= Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:50:26 +0200 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619) --Apple-Mail-18-1053309099 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed Hej! fr=E5n med ett=20= g=E4ng ... St=E4mmer det? mvh John FooDoo =96 Wap Made Easy _______________________________= --Apple-Mail-18-1053309099 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Hej! fr=E5n med ett=20= g=E4ng ... St=E4mmer det? mvh John Arial CCCC,0000,0000FooDoo =96 Wap Made = Easy _______________________________= --Apple-Mail-18-1053309099--

Please upload the message source as an attachment.

Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:57:56 +0000

Please upload the message source as an attachment.

Works fine here. Can you post a small screenshot of what the

Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:44:05 +0000

Works fine here. Can you post a small screenshot of what the message looks like when you reply to it?

junkatt.txt work fine here too. However i have such situati

Mon, 20 Sep 2004 00:22:59 +0000

junkatt.txt work fine here too. However i have such situation like this,here are the screenshot and source.This bug seems duplicate with bug#278,wasn't is ?

No, this is unrelated to bug 278, but I can reproduce this b

Mon, 20 Sep 2004 08:31:25 +0000

No, this is unrelated to bug 278, but I can reproduce this behaviour. This probably rather related to bug 178.

This should be fixed now (at least it looks like it works he

Thu, 04 Nov 2004 19:23:36 +0000

This should be fixed now (at least it looks like it works here). Can someone else confirm?

Confirm here,thanks a lot. David Chang

Fri, 05 Nov 2004 00:26:44 +0000

Confirm here,thanks a lot. David Chang