Well that all makes sense, I'll re-subscribe. I've been wondering why
the 'almighty mutt' wasn't performing to the standard I'd hoped. It
shames me to say it but I rather suspected it was my understanding of
the situation that was at fault.
Oh well, I just wish I'd stuck with computers from back in the Commodore
64 days (a very misspent youth)
So much to learn and so little time!
Ta very much David.
Nick
* David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020104 15:33]:
> Nick --
>
> ...and then Nick Wilson said...
> %
> % * David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020104 15:03]:
> % >
> % > ...and then Nick Wilson said...
> % > %
> % > % * David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020104 14:05]:
> % > % >
> % > % > ...and then Nick Wilson said...
> % > % >
> % > % > % Although I have this line in .muttrc
> % > % > % set record="~/Mail/records/"
> % > % > % Mutt appears to be saving outgoing copies of my mail to ~/Mail.
> % > % >
> % > % > $record is supposed to be a single mailbox (mbox file, Maildir dir, or
> ...
> % > % immediately. I guess I just create an empty file called records?
> % >
> % > Don't let my statement change the way you do your work; if you have
> ...
> %
> % Hmmm... Thanks.
>
> Sure thing.
>
>
> % Don't worry you're not changing the way I work at all, just helping me
> % define a way.
>
> Good enough. There are certainly lots of ways to do that :-)
>
>
> %
> % How do I reply to a particular part of the digest? If I see a 'RE:
> % something I posted' in the digest do I simply address a message to
> % [EMAIL PROTECTED] with that subject line or is there some way of mutt
> % knowing which part of the digest I'm reading?
>
> Well, AFAIK most folks don't reply to digests; they get the individual
> messages and then reply to them. The digest itself is a different
> message, and so when you reply to that you're in a different thread than
> you would be if you replied to the original.
>
> There are digest exploding tools out there, but they only have the info
> in the digest -- and the original Message-ID: and References: headers
> aren't in there.
>
> Using the subject of your message "thread" is a good start, because mutt
> will also group in similarly-subjected messages if you tell it it can
> be a little loose. mutt otherwise doesn't have a way to tell what part
> you meant, though. In fact, three different replies to the same digest,
> even if they had three different subjects, would all be threaded together
> if the parent message (the digest) were available because that's how
> threading works.
>
> Do you have a particular love for the digest version, or are you just
> used to that and haven't thought about changing? I think you'll very
> much like mutt's threading capabilities and will never go back to a
> digest again :-)
>
>
> %
> % Hope this isn't to dumb :)
>
> Not at all.
>
>
> %
> % Nick
>
> HTH & HAND & HNY
>
>
> %
> % --
> %
> % Nick Wilson
> %
> % Tel: +45 3325 0688
> % Fax: +45 3325 0677
> % Web: www.explodingnet.com
> %
> %
>
>
> :-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.justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
>
--
Nick Wilson
Tel: +45 3325 0688
Fax: +45 3325 0677
Web: www.explodingnet.com
