Sunil, et al --
...and then Sunil Shetye said...
% Quoting from David T-G's mail on Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 06:17:54AM -0400:
% > % So, did anyone come up with a strategy for getting mutt to ignore
% > % these messages which are put there by the UW IMAP server?
%
% In fact, this problem should not occur at all as imap servers do no
% pass this message as a new message. You should be encountering it only
% if you are downloading the mails as well as reading them on the
% server.
Right. I think that's his case.
%
% > I think the closest thing was to either push a limit like
% >
% > push <limit> ! 'DELETE THIS MESSAGE'
%
% Then, this series of mails will also get ignored:-)
Yeah -- hence the small commentary below.
%
% > or to auto-tag it as deleted and then push a sync (though there was some
% > discussion of how to best match only that message in the example case of
% > when someone forwards that message with the Subject: line intact and so
% > on).
%
% Autotagging will not work because if there are no mails matching, a
% wrong mail (probably, a new one) will get deleted.
I spoke incorrectly, I'm sure. I meant that mutt would find that message
with a push search command and then also push in a 'd'elete command.
Hmmm... That still has the problem of it not being in there at all
(after all, you're not likely to have *more* than one!) and passing in
the 'd' anyway, though... Ick. Better to upgrade the UW imapd as noted
in another reply :-)
%
% Sunil Shetye.
:-D
--
David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles
(play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.bigfoot.com/~davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
The "new millennium" starts at the beginning of 2001. There was no year 0.
Note: If bigfoot.com gives you fits, try sector13.org in its place. *sigh*
PGP signature
