David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 27 Dec 1999:
> ...and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] said...
> % Can anyone suggest a filter to not sign messages in reply-to messages
> % with this in the header:
> %
> % > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
>
> Now that's a good one... I won't try that one but I'll watch to see what
> someone (mikko? sec? :-) dreams up...
I wish I could help, but I don't think it's possible.
You can change the relevant values with send-hooks, but send-hooks only
act on the new message, not the headers or content of the message that's
being replied to. So you can choose not to sign based on recipient
address, but not based on a header in the original message.
So if you can't use send-hooks, there would be need to be some other
kind of hook or condition that would be invoked, but I can't think of
anything else that would act per-message. I suppose it might be
possible somehow to re-bind all (?) the movement keys so that they'd
set the variables correctly as you moved to each message, but that's
a pretty horrible solution even as far as kludges go. :-) Even if it's
possible, and I'm not sure about that.
I wonder if some sort of reply-hook would be needed in Mutt? Ie.
send-hooks would remain as they are, but when replying, the
message-being-replied to is checked against reply-hooks first, and after
that send-hooks are evaluated as currently. Something like that would
solve the current problem. But I'm not sure how complex adding that
would be. I do know that I wouldn't want to try coding it. :-)
Mikko
--
// Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
"I'm having an out of mind experience."
