I'm using pretty much the same combination without any trouble. One key point is to make sure that mutt and the terminal agree about the terminal emulation (try xterm-color) and the character set (try utf-8).
In Terminal.app, use the Advanced tab in the settings dialogue to change these points. Regards, -- Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On 2008-08-19 15:02:48 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: mutt-users@mutt.org > Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:02:48 -0700 > Subject: Mutt tty problems on Mac OS X 10.5.4 and mutt 1.5.18 > X-Spam-Level: > X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.6 > > I have a relatively new Max Pro Book (Book Pro?) running OS X 10.5.4 > and mutt 1.5.18. Using a standard Terminal with the default TERM > value of xterm, mutt has a terrible time displaying, with two symptom > that I have seen: > > 1. Re: Subject: headers show up in the summary display as lots of ~T > with a few other line noise chars thrown in for good measure. The > original message which starts the thread has its Subject: displayed > properly. I don't think it is the replies being garbled or in > some other character set because all Subject: headers look fine > when I read the actual message. This is always repeatable. > > 2. When you hit SPACE to read the body of a message, then finish and > "q" back to the summary listing, sometimes the previous message > display does not clear first and the summary is simply written on > top of it, requiring ^L to clean up the summary listing. This is > only sometimes, not always, and I have tried changing TERM to > vt100 with no effect (it is the default xterm). > > I have other machines I ssh into and use mutt on them and never have > seen these problems, either using ssh on this Mac or on other computers. > > -- > ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._. > Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket surgeon / [EMAIL PROTECTED] > GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E 6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933 > I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room > o > >
