Derek D. Martin wrote: > There seems to be no way to make mutt include a forwarded message in > quoted text.
why not just reply and then change the 'To' header. you can delete the 'in-reply-to' if you're worried about messing up headers. that said, it would be cool if there were 'forward_inline' and 'forward_quoted' options or something. > - sigs not included in quoting i've always seen sigs included in quoting. for instance, yours is: > --------------------------------------------- > I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! > GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D > Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu > Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org > I hate HTML mail as much as anyone. Honestly. But the fact is, a lot > of people use it. And sometimes, important people use it. Yes, mutt > does have ways to display these messages, but they are inconvenient at > best. And, AFAIK, mutt does not include a means of QUOTING these > messages, when one must reply to them. This sucks. i have no problem quoting them. i have: text/html; w3m -dump %s; nametemplate=%s.html; copiousoutput in my .mailcap and: # view annoying html mail inline auto_view text/html # if plain text and html prefer plain text alternative_order text/plain text/enriched text/html in my .muttrc is it really necessary to complain so much? perhaps it's best to first nicely ask how to do something. this is more likely to elicit a positive response. > - encrypting attachments > > Often when one sends an encrypted e-mail, one wants to send > attachments too. Sometimes you want the attachment encrypted, and > sometimes you don't (or actually, I ALWAYS do, but I can conceive of > reasons why one might not, or at least not care). Mutt seems to do > the latter by default, and there doesn't seem to be any way to do the > former in mutt, other than to uuencode all the files manually, and > paste them into the message that you're typing. This defeats the > whole point of having PGP support, IMO. mutt always encrypts attachments i'm 99% sure. i'm not sure if there's a way to NOT encrypt / sign attachments of a PGP signed or encrypted message. > - clearsigned and/or ascii-armored messages > > Whether you guys like it or not, most of the rest of the world uses > clearsigning and ascii-armored plaintext messages. Mutt falls down > here. You apparently refuse to support this, which makes no sense > since the majority of the PGP-using world uses this form of message. > This has caused me and a few of my mutt convertees and people we > converse with no end of headaches. [snip] > Also, mutt will only *send* PGP-MIME messages. However, there are > only a handful of clients that can properly handle PGP-MIME, while > virtually all off them (with the exception of mutt) handle > clearsigning and ASCII-armored plaintext messages just fine. you can use pgp_create_traditional. however outhouse doesn't work well with the MIME type set to application/pgp my understanding is that this is deprecated anyway, so perhaps it's best to change the default clearsign behavior to just plain text? just an idea.... > In my experience, trying to force people to do it the "right" way > usually guarantees that no one will want to play nice with you, unless > you're the guy with monopoly power well there are reasons for this; namely you can only send in US/ascii if you're using clear text signing / encryption. it seems a bit presumptious to assume that the whole world wants to send mail in us/ascii. it also makes signing / encryption of attachments impossible or difficult. > I'm aware of (and use) the patch to make mutt send > "outlook-compatible" messages, since almost NO ONE I converse with on > a regular basis can read PGP-MIME messages, but it still sends > PGP-MIME messages when the message includes attachments, and doesn't > seem to give me the option not to. This sucks. isn't this pretty much impossible (other than the method you mentioned before of including uuencoded text in the message body)? that was my understanding anyway. w
