Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list gopher); Sun, 14 Apr 2002 18:03:23 -0500 (EST) Return-Path: <jgoerzen@complete.org> Delivered-To: gopher@complete.org Received: from christoph.complete.org (pcp947166pcs.cstltn01.in.comcast.net [68.58.145.248]) by pi.glockenspiel.complete.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A013B811 for <gopher@complete.org>; Sun, 14 Apr 2002 18:03:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from christoph.complete.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by christoph.complete.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8595A42A for <gopher@complete.org>; Sun, 14 Apr 2002 09:39:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 09:39:51 -0500 Subject: [gopher] Re: mime types Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v481) From: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> To: gopher@complete.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3C4DF4D7.2D73A05F@sympatico.ca> Message-Id: <7A2C152B-4FB5-11D6-92B7-0003930BF072@complete.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) X-archive-position: 582 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org X-original-sender: jgoerzen@complete.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: gopher@complete.org List-help: <mailto:ecartis@complete.org?Subject=help> List-unsubscribe: <mailto:gopher-request@complete.org?Subject=unsubscribe> List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-ID: Gopher <gopher.complete.org> X-List-ID: Gopher <gopher.complete.org> List-subscribe: <mailto:gopher-request@complete.org?Subject=subscribe> List-owner: <mailto:jgoerzen@complete.org> List-post: <mailto:gopher@complete.org> List-archive: <http://www.complete.org/mailinglists/archives/> X-list: gopher

I suppose one could try that -- it could very well be slow, though (having to open, read, close, etc all those files..) I've got some directories on quux.org with hundreds of files that make really good test cases for performance :-)

On Tuesday, January 22, 2002, at 06:25 PM, Ralph Furmaniak wrote:

> > You can figure out the mime-type from the extension (as umn gopherd > does), but I was wondering if it would make any sense to try 'file -i' > >