Gary Johnson wrote:

> On 2012-11-27, mutt wrote:
> > Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi
> > > 
> > > Does anyone have or know of a perl or python script, or even a shell
> > > script, that removes the multipart/(mixed|alternative| ... ) parts of
> > > incoming mail and leaves or converts the message into plain text?
> > > Also, i wouldn't want to lose any attachments that people might send me.
> > > 
> > > Jamie.
> > 
> > hi,
> > 
> > i wrote something like that. by default, it converts to text anything
> > that can be converted to text and deletes everything else but you
> > can turn off any specific transformation. it can delete specific
> > mail headers. it translates (most) winmail.dat attachments. if a
> > transformation fails, it leaves the original in place for safety by
> > default. it works via procmail on individual messages or it can be
> > applied to an entire mbox file.
> > 
> > it requires the presence of various utilities (e.g. perl, antiword
> > or catdoc, xls2csv, lynx, pdftotext and mktemp). you'd probably just
> > need lynx and mktemp installed.
> 
> Why aren't you all using mutt's built-in ability to select
> MIME-type-to-text converters?  There's no risk of losing a message
> through improper conversion, you have some limited choice over
> conversion methods (depending on whether the message/attachment is
> displayed by the pager or via the attachment menu), and since the
> message itself is unaffected, you can use different methods of
> viewing messages in different environments and at different times as
> your methods improve.
> 
> Regards,
> Gary

the phrase "the message itself is unaffected" is the main reason.
i wanted to delete/convert the attachments permanently.
what you suggest wouldn't do that.

i was receiving many large emails in my work mailbox at the time.
they were large because they contained many useless attachments.
i wanted to keep the semantic content of the messages and
i wanted to delete the useless parts of the messages.
by doing so, my mailbox was about a tenth of the size it
would otherwise have been.

Reply via email to