Re: mutt & exchange

[Vineet Kumar]

* Johannes Zellner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010914 05:10]:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 04:05:26PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > Johannes Zellner  [12/09/01 12:04 +0200]:
> > > how do I use mutt with an EXCHANGE server ?
> > > Actually I can already READ mail by having
> > > set imap_user=""
> > > set imap_pass=""
> > 
> > > but if I try to SEND mail, it tells me
> > > Error 127 .. Exec error.
> >  
> > Mutt doesn't have a builtin smtp client of any kind.  See if you can compile
> > Masqmail / Nullmailer on cygwin (or download Mercury from
> > http://www.pmail.com) and config that to smarthost through your exchange box
> > (or if you have a NAT'ted connection to the 'net, use mercury to send direct
> > to MX)
> > 
> > > If someone has any EXCHANGE related tips, please share them with me!
> > > (Using mutt / UNIX since quite a while, my job forces me now to
> > > work on this OS-wannabe).
> 
> hmm. I've installed ssmtp from cygwin now, configured it and
> succeed in doing:
> 
> # echo fred | ssmtp some@address
> 
> ssmtp is not running as daemon. Now I've configured mutt with
> 
> sendmail="ssmtp"
> 
> but I still get the message
> 
> Error sending message, child exited 127 (Exec error.).
> 
> To summarize: I can send mails with ssmtp from command line
> but not from mutt.

Check the path, and ensure that if envelope_from is set that ssmtp
allows the -f  argument (I don't know one way or
another that it does or doesn't). I think the solution here is to
specify an absolute path to ssmtp, but I may be wrong.

HTH,
-- 
Vineet   http://www.anti-dmca.org
Unauthorized use of this .sig may constitute violation of US law.
echo Qba\'g gernq ba zr\! |tr 'a-zA-Z' 'n-za-mN-ZA-M'

 PGP signature

Re: Mutt + PGP

[Ailbhe Leamy]

On (14/09/01 15:00), David T-G wrote:

> ...and then Ailbhe Leamy said... 
% On (14/09/01 09:41), David T-G wrote: 
[attribs snipped, because it's basically a David-Ailbhe-David
discussion so far]

% Having a valid From: address is hardly the same as adding a 
% pgp-signature to things. 
% 
% Having a sigfile doesn't seem like the same thing to me, either.

> I accept both of those points.  I also reserve the right to draw the
> "same thing" line anywhere I please.

I understand that. I was kind of hoping you could explain to me why you
seem to think that they _are_ the same thing. For some reason I'm
assuming that you haven't drawn a line arbitrarily based on the colour
of the dirt on your shoes, or something.

> % > It is my not-so-humble opinion that everyone everywhere should be

> % Yes, but _why_?
>
> Why use PGP/GPG?  Because it should be mainstream and available
> to all, it should be easy to use and familiar to all, and private
> communication should be both avaiable and commonplace rather than
> challenging and noteworthy.

OK, all of this I understand. I completely fail to understand why it
should apply to public communication, as distinct from private
communication.

> % In what way is it useful to pgp-sign or encrypt a mail that is for
>
> I can't think of a time I'd encrypt a mail to a mailing list, since I
> don't know of any encryption-aware mailing list servers (though such
> things have been discussed even here).

Oh good.

> It's useful to sign a message
> so that others can confirm that the message came from me as they see
> it -- whether because I am concerned about forgery, concerned about
> a patch or piece of code being maliciously modified, or concerned
> about my messages being accidentally munged in transmission (found
> on this list only a month or two ago and bought to my attention by
> a guy -- whose name I have now forgotten but whose attention is
> still appreciated -- who wondered why my messages kept saying "bad
> signature" and eventually tracked down to an added space and newline,
> IIRC).

All of these are good reasons, and I understand that if in the past you
have been a victim of malicious forgery, or anything else, you'd want
to make sure it couldn't happen again. But I don't see how pgp-signing
things to a public mailing list ensures that.

> % distribution to a mailing list? You are aware of the fact that there
> % are archives?
>
> Yes.  I must admit that I don't see your point here, though.

Well, if I read your mail using a browser to access the archives, I
absolutely cannot verify whether your pgp signature is good, bad, or
yellow.

> % > Everything I can do to encourage such behavior and raise
> % > everyone's awareness is thus a good thing.  Since I don't often
> % > have to post anonymously (though I generally don't have a problem
> % > with those who do), I can sign everything.
> %
> % OK. That's really useful. I see this. Er. Where's your public
> % key? And
>
> At the moment I'm in transition, so you'll not find a public key for
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] out there; sorry about that, but you can find
> it if you look for [EMAIL PROTECTED] and messages sent there will
> get to me.  You can, however, find my key on the public key servers as
> well as at my web site; just ask.

Well, since every message you send is pgp-signed, having your public
key would be useful, I think. Though admittedly a valid public key for
the address you actually use would be best.

> % how do I verify that it _is_ your public key? If I can't, what
> % possible use could it be?
>
> It's a start.  I haven't been to any signing parties, I admit, but
> there are those who have bothered to contact me directly and exchange
> keys.

Well, it's probably because I know too many people too interested in
security, but I'd not trust your key to prove anything unless we
exchanged keys face to face, and even then I wouldn't trust it much
unless it had been signed by people I know and trust. I don't know you,
I therefore don't trust you, and I don't trust your public key. All it
proves to me is that your messages are probably consistently being sent
by the same person.

> % > Here, of all places, it should be no biggie; mutt can handle
> % > GPG/PGP with ease, and procmail/formail could strip out the
> % > signature entirely, and this is the group that would know how to
> % > do it.

> % I repeat: archives?
> % http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mutt-users/message/21394
>
> Looks fine to me.  I still don't see your point.  You can't be arguing
> that I shouldn't sign my messages because the archive server can't
> read 'em, and I can't imagine that you'd argue that signing is useless
> because the archive doesn't retain it (but if you are my answer is "So
> what? I have no particular interest in the archives and can't help
> that the signature is stripped.").

Um. Does "I have no particular interest in the archives" translate to
"I have no particular interest in the people who read the list
primarily throug

Re: Mutt + PGP

[Ailbhe Leamy]

On (14/09/01 15:26), Justin R. Miller wrote:

> Ailbhe, you should read up on the web of trust.  While it is the weak
> point in public key crypto, it answers your question.

Trouble with the web of trust is that I don't trust it unless it
contains a fairly high proportion of people I know and trust.
Admittedly, this is partly because I like to know that my signature on a
key is trustworthy.

Vanity...

Ailbhe

-- 
Homepage: http://ailbhe.ossifrage.net/

old messages in mbox

[Matt Spong]

Hi

First of all I'd just like to say that mutt rocks... I can't live
without it :)

However, I'm having a little problem...  It seems to be deleting messages 
from ~/mbox which are older than a week or so.  Is it possible to turn off 
this behavior?  I don't see anything in the documentation about it.

Thanks
Matt Spong
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
Matt Spong || [EMAIL PROTECTED] || AIM: Spong1027 || http://www.forkbomb.net

 PGP signature

reply defaults

[melissa ion kibbe]

Hello,
I am having difficulty finding the documentation on how to edit the
'reply description', in which the mailer prints out something to the
effect of "on such-and-such a date so-and-so wrote --"  I would like to
change the default on this, and I am pretty sure it is possible, but I
am having difficulty finding documentation on it.  I would appreciate
any help.  Please cc me as I am not subscribed to the list as of this writing.

thanks in advance,
melissa.

-- 

http://web.morgul.net/~atomic  "I'll rob that rich person and give it  
to some poor deserving slob.
GAT d--@ -p+ c+++() l++ That will *prove* I'm Robin Hood."
u+ e+(*) m* s n+(---) h- f+   -- Daffy Duck, "Robin Hood Daffy"
!g w+++ t++(+++) r+ x+
   "A mathematician is a device for turning 
coffee into theorems."
  -- P. Erdos

Re: reply defaults

[Michael Tatge]

melissa ion kibbe muttered:
> I am having difficulty finding the documentation on how to edit the
> 'reply description', in which the mailer prints out something to the
> effect of "on such-and-such a date so-and-so wrote --"

The var you are looking for is called attribution.

HTH,

Michael
-- 

PGP-Key: http://www-stud.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/~tatgeml/public.key

Re: Bouncing messages from a specific email

[Cliff Sarginson]

On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 04:23:55PM -0400, David T-G wrote:
> Gord --
> 
> ...and then Gord Mc.Pherson said...
> % Hi,
> % 
> %Is there a way to have mutt automatically bounce a message from a
> % specific email address. The only reference to bouncing email is
> % 'bounce_delivered' and I don't think it's the option I'm looking for.
> 
I think this should be handled by the MTA.
I use postfix and have it do a header check for a particular sender
who keeps sending mail to my domain (usual stuff about earning
millions)...

I presume sendmail can do this as well in it's own mysterious way.

-- 
Regards
Cliff

Re: inline GnuPG signature

[David T-G]

Rino, Federico, et al --

...and then Jean-Sebastien Morisset said...
% On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 08:46:49PM -0400, Federico Grau wrote:
% > 
% > messages.  However it does not automatically verify inline pgp messages,
% > unless i pipe them to "gpg --verify".  is there a better way (i checked my
% > docs but have not yet searched the list archives)?
% 
% If you use procmail, add this to the top of your procmailrc:
% 
% ---BEGIN---
[snip]

This, of course, is necessary because folks either use broken mailers
like LookOut! or manage to turn their mutts around to do it wrong :-)


:-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!


 PGP signature

Re: inline GnuPG signature

[David T-G]

Rino --

...and then Rino Mardo said...
% On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 08:46:49PM -0400 or thereabouts, Federico Grau wrote:
% > 
% > set pgp_create_traditional=yes
% > 
% > from the man page:
...
% >   Also note that using the old-style PGP message for?
% >   mat is strongly deprecated.
...
% > 
% hehe. if it's strongly deprecated i'd rather stay with what the
% default settings of mutt.

Good for you!  I was going to beg you not to go down the path to the dark
side, but I see you've corrected your course on your own :-)


% 
% -- 
% "In is out and out is in.  But out is out and in is in."
%   -- Pumbaa


:-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!


 PGP signature

Re: inline GnuPG signature

[David T-G]

Federico, et al --

...and then Federico Grau said...
% On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 10:20:30AM +0800, Rino Mardo wrote:
% > On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 08:46:49PM -0400 or thereabouts, Federico Grau wrote:
% > > 
% > > 
% > > set pgp_create_traditional=yes
% > > 
% > > from the man page:
...
% > >   Also note that using the old-style PGP message for?
% > >   mat is strongly deprecated.
...
% > > 
% > hehe. if it's strongly deprecated i'd rather stay with what the
% > default settings of mutt.
% > 
% 
% yeah, unfortunately the mountains of ms outlook lemmings at my job bitch about
% MIMI/PGP because they have to double click on the email to read it... 

I'll refrain from the obvious Outhouse bashings :-)


% 
% so I am leaning towards using the option myself, or I believe there is is a
% way to configure mutt to only use this option for X users (I have yet to dig
% through the archives).

I would recommend not only Shane Wegener's pgp_outlook_compat patch,
which *really* twists mutt around so that LookOut! users are entirely
complacent and happy, but also send-hooks to recognize users (or domains)
and set pgp_create_traditional and pgp_outlook_compat accordingly.


% 
% donfede

HTH & HAND


:-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!


 PGP signature

Re: Bouncing messages from a specific email

[David T-G]

Cliff --

...and then Cliff Sarginson said...
% 
% I use postfix and have it do a header check for a particular sender
% who keeps sending mail to my domain (usual stuff about earning
% millions)...

WHAT?!  THERE'S A WAY TO EARN MILLIONS VIA EMAIL?!?!?!?  IS IT FAST, OR
DOES IT TAKE A LONG TIME?  YOU HAVE TO TELL ME MORE!


;-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!


 PGP signature

Re: old messages in mbox

[David T-G]

Matt --

...and then Matt Spong said...
% Hi

Hello!


% 
% First of all I'd just like to say that mutt rocks... I can't live
% without it :)

I know what you mean!


% 
% However, I'm having a little problem...  It seems to be deleting messages 
% from ~/mbox which are older than a week or so.  Is it possible to turn off 
% this behavior?  I don't see anything in the documentation about it.

Unless you (or, since you still have the bubbling enthusiasm of the newly
enlightened, perhaps your SysAdmin) have done some fussing around in your
muttrc file, that's not at all a mutt "feature".

You might check your $move_old variable to see if, every time you quit
mutt, you're automatically moving old message to a secondary folder
(usually ~/Mail/mbox, AKA =mbox, IIRC).  You might also dig in and find
how to duplicate the condition; "seems to" is awfully vague :-)


% 
% Thanks
% Matt Spong
% [EMAIL PROTECTED]
% 
% -- 
% Matt Spong || [EMAIL PROTECTED] || AIM: Spong1027 || http://www.forkbomb.net


:-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!


 PGP signature

Re: reply defaults

[David T-G]

Melissa --

...and then melissa ion kibbe said...
% Hello,

Hello!


% I am having difficulty finding the documentation on how to edit the
% 'reply description', in which the mailer prints out something to the
% effect of "on such-and-such a date so-and-so wrote --"  I would like to

It's called the "attribution string", it's controlled by $attribution,
and it's found at 6.3.14 of the manual (you can probably pull it up by
hitting F1 right now).


% change the default on this, and I am pretty sure it is possible, but I

Just about anything is possible with mutt ;-)


% am having difficulty finding documentation on it.  I would appreciate
% any help.  Please cc me as I am not subscribed to the list as of this writing.

Well, hurry up and sign up! :-)


% 
% thanks in advance,
% melissa.
% 
% -- 
% 
% http://web.morgul.net/~atomic  "I'll rob that rich person and give it  
% to some poor deserving slob.
% GAT d--@ -p+ c+++() l++ That will *prove* I'm Robin Hood."
% u+ e+(*) m* s n+(---) h- f+   -- Daffy Duck, "Robin Hood Daffy"
% !g w+++ t++(+++) r+ x+

I haven't seen this in a while!  For reference:

-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.1
GCS/IT/CM !d-? s:>- a C++$ USLBVH+++$> P++>$ L++>+++$ !E--- W++$ 
N+(+++)>$ o+>++$ K w(--) !O- !M-(--) V-(--) !PS+++(+) PE++(+) Y+ PGP+++ t+ 
!5(+) !X !R !tv b+++>$ DI>$ !D- G e++ h r+++ y>*
--END GEEK CODE BLOCK--


:-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!


 PGP signature

Re: Mutt + PGP

[David T-G]

Ailbhe --

...and then Ailbhe Leamy said...
% On (14/09/01 15:00), David T-G wrote:
% 
% > ...and then Ailbhe Leamy said... 
% % On (14/09/01 09:41), David T-G wrote: 
% [attribs snipped, because it's basically a David-Ailbhe-David
% discussion so far]

Oh, but that's where the fun comes in! :-)


% 
% % Having a valid From: address is hardly the same as adding a 
% % pgp-signature to things. 
% % 
% % Having a sigfile doesn't seem like the same thing to me, either.
% 
% > I accept both of those points.  I also reserve the right to draw the
% > "same thing" line anywhere I please.
% 
% I understand that. I was kind of hoping you could explain to me why you
% seem to think that they _are_ the same thing. For some reason I'm

Sure.  Think of the line as a linear equation, much like x=y.  On the low
end of the graph you have someone who perhaps signs his name at the bottom
of his post but has an anonymous address like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
or such, or one who [perhaps] has some nameless address and doesn't fill
in a name.  In the middle you have someone who has realistic contact
information in his email.  On the high side you have someone who not
only provides a name (more in a moment) but also provides a mechanism for
not only ensuring that the post came from him but also which you might,
through the WoT, be able to believe to be a real person.

This, as it stands, certainly isn't perfect as a means of identification,
but that's not my goal.  I have created the persona [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and will later connect that to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but neither of
those is guaranteed to tell you anything about David Thorburn-Gundlach.
I have also created the persona [EMAIL PROTECTED] for my work as the
Keeper of the Light Bulb Joke List, and it doesn't have to be related to
davidtg@bigfoot even if I'm the same physical natural person.


% assuming that you haven't drawn a line arbitrarily based on the colour
% of the dirt on your shoes, or something.

Nope :-)


% 
% > Why use PGP/GPG?  Because it should be mainstream and available
% > to all, it should be easy to use and familiar to all, and private
% > communication should be both avaiable and commonplace rather than
% > challenging and noteworthy.
% 
% OK, all of this I understand. I completely fail to understand why it
% should apply to public communication, as distinct from private
% communication.

1) What I say publicly should be verifiable as coming from me, or perhaps
that should be stated as it should be clear that something publicly
stated in my name that didn't come from me if fact did not.

2) By using PGP in public communication I reach the greater masses and,
even if it's when people ask "hey, what's this .att thing on your mail?",
spread the word about PGP.


% 
% > % In what way is it useful to pgp-sign or encrypt a mail that is for
% >
% > I can't think of a time I'd encrypt a mail to a mailing list, since I
% > don't know of any encryption-aware mailing list servers (though such
% > things have been discussed even here).
% 
% Oh good.

Do I detect a note of relief? :-)  C'mon, a note encrypted to 140 people
wouldn't be *that* big!


% 
...
% > still appreciated -- who wondered why my messages kept saying "bad
% > signature" and eventually tracked down to an added space and newline,
% > IIRC).
% 
% All of these are good reasons, and I understand that if in the past you
% have been a victim of malicious forgery, or anything else, you'd want
% to make sure it couldn't happen again. But I don't see how pgp-signing
% things to a public mailing list ensures that.

Why should I wait until something happens before wanting to ensure that
it can't happen?  By signing *everything* I send I increase the
understanding that anything I don't sign probably didn't come from me.


% 
% > % distribution to a mailing list? You are aware of the fact that there
% > % are archives?
% >
% > Yes.  I must admit that I don't see your point here, though.
% 
% Well, if I read your mail using a browser to access the archives, I
% absolutely cannot verify whether your pgp signature is good, bad, or
% yellow.

So I now understand.  I must respond "your loss", since the message was
signed when I sent it.

If your point is that, since the archives toss the signature, I should
dispense with signing, I heartily disagree.


% 
% > % OK. That's really useful. I see this. Er. Where's your public
% > % key? And
% >
% > At the moment I'm in transition, so you'll not find a public key for
% > [EMAIL PROTECTED] out there; sorry about that, but you can find
% > it if you look for [EMAIL PROTECTED] and messages sent there will
% > get to me.  You can, however, find my key on the public key servers as
% > well as at my web site; just ask.
% 
% Well, since every message you send is pgp-signed, having your public

You can obtain it by searching for the key ID instead of the email
address, or by dropping me a note directly (and you can verify the key
you get back, now that you'll have the additional i

Re: old messages in mbox

[David T-G]

Matt --

...and then Matt Spong said...
% Hi

Hello!


% 
% > Unless you (or, since you still have the bubbling enthusiasm of the newly
% > enlightened, 
% 
% Nope... been using mutt for 2 years now. :)

Hokay, you're simply bubbly like I am :-)


% 
% > perhaps your SysAdmin) have done some fussing around in your
% > muttrc file, that's not at all a mutt "feature".
% 
% Yeah, I didn't think it was supposed to do that.

Right.


% 
% I don't see anything in my muttrc that would cause this, but maybe you
% can take a look?  It's at http://forkbomb.net/stuff/muttrc

Lessee...

Nope; short and sweet, and nothing scary looking.


% 
% Also, I admin my own boxes, and don't have a system-wide muttrc

Good enough.


% 
% > You might check your $move_old variable to see if, every time you quit
% > mutt, you're automatically moving old message to a secondary folder
% > (usually ~/Mail/mbox, AKA =mbox, IIRC).  
% 
% When I switch to a different mailbox or quit, it asks me if I want to
% move messages to ~/mbox.

And do you say yes or no?  I see from your muttrc that your inbox is in
/var/spool, so there shouldn't be any confusion there...


% 
% > You might also dig in and find
% > how to duplicate the condition; "seems to" is awfully vague :-)
% 
% Will do, and I'll let you know if I manage to reproduce it.

That's always a good start :-)


% 
% thanks
% Matt
% 
% -- 
% Matt Spong || [EMAIL PROTECTED] || AIM: Spong1027 || http://www.forkbomb.net

HTH & HAND


:-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!


 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and GnuPG

[Thomas Kniep]

Am 11.09.2001 (18:21) schrieb Ben Jones:

> > I still get an error message saying 'PGP signature could NOT be
> > verified.'
> Try this line in your .muttrc . . .
> set pgp_good_sign="^gpg: Good signature from"

I am using a german environment, it works well with 

set pgp_good_sign="^gpg: Korrekte Unterschrift von"

but I don`t really like to use this hardcoded language stuff. Is there
any language independent way to use gpg and mutt without warnings? Is
there no errorcode I could use?

-- 
Thomas Kniep ([EMAIL PROTECTED])


 PGP signature

Moving from PGP to GnuPG

[Jean-Sebastien Morisset]

I decided to give GnuPG a try. I've exported/imported my keys and
configured Mutt. The only thing that remains a mystery is how to retrieve
new public keys from within mutt. I wrote a little script for PGP I used
to call using "!pgp-get ", but that was a bit tedious, and one of
the reasons I switched to GnuPG. I figure there must be some kind of
semi-automatic method... Any hints?

Thanks,
js.
-- 
Jean-Sebastien Morisset, Sr. UNIX Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Personal Homepage 
This is Linux Country. On a quiet night you can hear Windows NT reboot!
 please pgp encrypt all correspondence 

 PGP signature

Re: Moving from PGP to GnuPG

[Jonathan Irving]

On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:18:36PM -0400, Jean-Sebastien Morisset wrote:
> I decided to give GnuPG a try. I've exported/imported my keys and
> configured Mutt. The only thing that remains a mystery is how to retrieve
> new public keys from within mutt. I wrote a little script for PGP I used
> to call using "!pgp-get ", but that was a bit tedious, and one of
> the reasons I switched to GnuPG. I figure there must be some kind of
> semi-automatic method... Any hints?

You need to put

  keyserver wwwkeys.us.pgp.net

in your ~/.gnupg/options file (or whichever keyserver you want to
use).  Also, if you use a HTTP proxy, set the environment
variable http_proxy and add

  honor-http-proxy

to the ~/.gnupg/options file too.

HTH

cheers
j

-- 
| ECHELON Fodder | USCODE Menwith DRA spy van JRA|
++---+

 PGP signature

Re: old messages in mbox

[Matt Spong]

> % Nope... been using mutt for 2 years now. :)
> 
> Hokay, you're simply bubbly like I am :-)

Yep :)

> Nope; short and sweet, and nothing scary looking.

Hrm. :\

> % When I switch to a different mailbox or quit, it asks me if I want to
> % move messages to ~/mbox.
> 
> And do you say yes or no?  

Depends... I usually say no for a day or two, since there's usually mail
that I've been putting off responding to (and if I move it to mbox I'll
forget about it), but once I've gone through all my mail I say yes.

thanks
Matt


-- 
Matt Spong || [EMAIL PROTECTED] || AIM: Spong1027 || http://www.forkbomb.net

 PGP signature

More Mutt & GPG Question?

[Gord Mc.Pherson]

Hi Folks,

   Does anyone know how I can stop message bleed-thru with gpg? When I'm
   reading messages, I find that if during the execution of gpg makes the
   screen scroll up a line or two, I get bleed-thru from the previous 
   message. (hope that makes sense). 
   
   Anyhow I find it quite distracting and yes I know ctrl-l will refresh
   the screen, but that means having to hit ctrl-l after every message
   that's been digitally signed.

-- 

Gord Mc.Pherson| September 11th 2001 is a day we will always remember,
   | and one we will never let the enemies of freedom forget
   | 
   | GPG Key ID: 0xC6427B28 -- http://gmc.org/gpg.html
   |
   | Seti@Home Stats: 1426 WU's processed in 2.565 years.
   | System Uptime: 50 days 7 hours 35 minutes.


 PGP signature

Re: Mutt + PGP

[Andy Smith]

On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 12:04:51PM +0100, Ailbhe Leamy wrote:

> OK, all of this I understand. I completely fail to understand why it
> should apply to public communication, as distinct from private
> communication.

Because it is still important to know that a public message comes
from the person it really comes from, and has not been altered on
the way.

Public != unimportant.

-- 
 i shouldnt have touched myself when i was in the zen state or near
  it.

Re: New mail 'N' flag not showing up

[Denis Perelyubskiy]

 * Rino Mardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [09-Sat-01 00:16 -0700]:
 >
 >On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 08:00:17PM -0700 or thereabouts, Denis Perelyubskiy wrote:
 >>  * Rino Mardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [09-Fri-01 19:56 -0700]:
 >>  >
 >>  >On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 04:45:37PM -0700 or thereabouts, Denis Perelyubskiy wrote:
 >>[ ..snip.. ]
 >>  >have you checked the "set mark_old" in your ~/.muttrc ?
 >>  >
 >>  >i have 1.3.22i and don't experience the problem you're having.
 >> 
 >> yeah, i have the following line in my file:
 >> unset mark_old
 >> 
 >> further, i think it said in teh docs that it does not matter
 >> for 'mbox' mailboxes
 >> 
 >> do you also use 'mbox', or mh/maildir stuff?
 >> 
 >i use maildir.

Rino,

this is probably not interesting to you, but perhaps someone
will google for this thread.

It appears that most of my troubles went away after i
discovered the 'buffy_size' configuration options. once i
recompiled with that, almost everything started working as i
would expect.

/var/spool/mail/denisp still does not display N upon
entrance, but I will see if i will get a minute or two to
dig in the source code to find out why ... i am not saying
the trouble is with the source code, but, for example, i
found out about buffy_size option from the source code :)

the most bizarre thing, is that 'N' does not show up next to
my spool mailbox in the browser, but if i start mutt with -Z
it goes into the spool ... so it does know that i have new
mail, just does not want to tell me :)

but that i can live with

denis

-- 
// mailto: Denis Perelyubskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
// icq   : 12359698
// PGP   : http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~denisp/files/pgp.asc

Re: reply defaults

[Rino Mardo]

On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:14:48AM -0400 or thereabouts, melissa ion kibbe wrote:
> Hello,
> I am having difficulty finding the documentation on how to edit the
> 'reply description', in which the mailer prints out something to the
> effect of "on such-and-such a date so-and-so wrote --"  I would like to
> change the default on this, and I am pretty sure it is possible, but I
> am having difficulty finding documentation on it.  I would appreciate
> any help.  Please cc me as I am not subscribed to the list as of this writing.
> 
> thanks in advance,
> melissa.
> 
melissa, what you're looking for is attribution which you can find in
your "~/.muttrc" file:

# set attribution="On %d, %n wrote:"
# # #
# # # Name: attribution
# # # Type: string
# # # Default: "On %d, %n wrote:"
# # #
# # #
# # # This is the string that will precede a message which has been
# # included
# # # in a reply.  For a full listing of defined escape sequences see
# # the
# # # section on ``index_format''.
# #
#

-- 
"In is out and out is in.  But out is out and in is in."
-- Pumbaa

 PGP signature

mutt & Cygwin [was: Re: mutt & exchange]

[Piet Delport]

On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 at 10:48:30 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> Piet Delport  [14/09/01 00:40 +0200]:
> > Actually, i remember ssmtp running quite well when used mutt on Cygwin
> > (i've since moved to FreeBSD, thank Eris).  It can be installed very
> > easily via Cygwin's setup.exe, AFAIR, just like mutt.
> 
> Speaking of cygwin, is there any way to spool mail locally on the doze box
> using a fetchmail variant?
> 
> c:/mail/ having several mboxes for example.

I used to do just that, running both fetchmail and procmail as if on a
unix.

I compiled both from the stock sources, although there where some
gotchas with fetchmail.  From memory:

1. I had to ./configure fetchmail with `--with-included-gettext', as it
   didn't like the gettext headers that came with cygwin.

2. I had to patch fetchmail to make it not complain about the
   permissions of .fetchmailrc, as the requirement that it isn't
   world-readable doesn't really apply under Win9x.  It's silly that
   fetchmail doesn't have an override for this behaviour, IMHO.

   (The patch involved #ifdef'ing out the few lines of code in
   rcfile_y.y (IIRC) that do the check.)

procmail was relatively painless, except that `make install' failed
because there was a file in the distribution called `INSTALL', which,
because of the case-insensitiveness of Winders, confused make greatly
until i moved `INSTALL'.

If you're planning to run gpg as well:  i had to ./configure it with
`--disable-dynload' and `--disable-asm' to get it to compile, and ended
up #ifdef'ing out some code that (harmlessly) complains about insecure
memory as well.

If you want, i can dig up my notes on all of the above, to see exactly
what i changed.

-- 
Piet Delport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Today's subliminal thought is:

 PGP signature

Re: More Mutt & GPG Question?

[David T-G]

Gord --

...and then Gord Mc.Pherson said...
% Hi Folks,

Hello!


% 
%Does anyone know how I can stop message bleed-thru with gpg? When I'm
...
%the screen, but that means having to hit ctrl-l after every message
%that's been digitally signed.

I'm sorry I can't provide more detail (and I was even affected by it in
the past) but I can at least say that this has come up before.  Try an
archive search; I think that it might have had to do with building against
ncurses vs curses or *curses vs something else...  It's been a while.

If you don't find anything, send me a prod and I'll dig back through my
posts when I have more time, because I am almost certain that I spoke
up about this (BTW, if you're after my post(s) look only for davidtg@
'cuz it could have been in either of my bigfoot or cyberdude days, and it
was certainly before justpickone).


Best of luck!

:-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!


 PGP signature

Re: [1.3.22.1] history bug

[Piet Delport]

On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 at 11:52:50 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> With Mutt 1.3.22.1, when I type 's' to save a message to a mailbox:
> 
> The up arrow (history-up) seems to behave correctly, going backward
> through the history. But when I use the down arrow (history-down),
> instead of going forward, it still goes backward.

I can confirm that here (see headers for version info).  The same seems
to happen at the prompt for changing to another mailbox (`c').

-- 
Piet Delport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Today's subliminal thought is:

 PGP signature

OT: Shell scripting [was: Re: Fix for PGP copyright thing...]

[Piet Delport]

--a2FkP9tdjPU2nyhF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 at 07:03:19 -0400, David T-G wrote:
> % ---BEGIN---
> % #!/bin/sh
> ...
> % pgp $* 2>$PGP_ERR 1>$PGP_OUT
>=20
> BTW, you might want to modify your script to protect any arguments with
> embedded spaces.  Change the line above to
>=20
>   pgp ${1+"$@"} 2>$PGP_ERR 1>$PGP_OUT
>=20
> and you're golden.

It's much more straightforward to use:

pgp "$@" [...]

actually. :)

> [BTW, I haven't *yet* found this in any shell documentation since I
> saw it in a shell programming tip; can anyone provide me a pointer for
> further research?]

I daresay you haven't been looking hard enough. :)

Quoting FreeBSD's "man sh" [from the listing of special parameters]:
|   @   Expands to the positional parameters, starting from one.
|   When the expansion occurs within double-quotes, each
|   positional parameter expands as a separate argument.  If
|   there are no positional parameters, the expansion of @
|   generates zero arguments, even when @ is double-quoted.
|   What this basically means, for example, is if $1 is ``abc''
|   and $2 is ``def ghi'', then "$@" expands to the two
|   arguments:
| "abc"   "def ghi"

As for further research, i generally got by on the sh and bash manpages
up till now.  They're generally very concentrated in terms of info, and
take a while to sink in.  I find myself realizing new things all the
time when i'm (re-)reading them. :-)

(Prominent example: just now while writing this mail, i saw for the
first time how ${1+"$@"} works.  Ingenious approach, even if a bit
redundant.  Most probably in the context of the tip you found it in it
was a workaround for a shell that didn't handle a plain "$@" correctly?)

--=20
Piet Delport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Today's subliminal thought is:

--a2FkP9tdjPU2nyhF
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE7pB2mzRUP82sZFCcRAvCVAJ4jzkyFEmALLlEhocnWHQAvXxm4qgCffPxJ
tpv05IQHXabtYMM1jKfdM6c=
=3Ffj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--a2FkP9tdjPU2nyhF--

Re: esc t ..why doesn't work when a message is displayed?

[Piet Delport]

--JBi0ZxuS5uaEhkUZ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 at 09:26:48 -0400, David T-G wrote:
> ...and then Olaf Schulz said...
[...]
> % But (at least in mutt 12.5i) trying to type ':tag-thread' while in
> the pager % has no effect. Maybe it's a problem with the programming
> logic behind it that % makes it impossible to have tag-thread
> available in the pager?
>=20
> I have no answer for that, since I'm no coder by far.  But perhaps
> that's why it's not bound in the pager by default :-)
>=20
> Yes, it seems to me that just about every function should be available
> just about everywhere.  Go figure.

I doubt it's a design limitation... delete-thread and friends are all
available in the pager as well as in the index, so why not tag-thread?

A temporary workaround is something like this:

macro pager \ec ""   "tag the current thre=
ad"

I use a similar macro to do a sync-mailbox from the pager.

--=20
Piet Delport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Today's subliminal thought is:

--JBi0ZxuS5uaEhkUZ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE7pCDuzRUP82sZFCcRAp2wAJ46DpQVBgBRhxH89We0peQirMEoigCfTOAQ
hLhZOuIgFPxkSZWgGHfN6X0=
=ERn1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--JBi0ZxuS5uaEhkUZ--

Re: Bouncing messages from a specific email

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Cliff Sarginson  [15/09/01 13:53 +0200]:
> I think this should be handled by the MTA.
> I use postfix and have it do a header check for a particular sender
> who keeps sending mail to my domain (usual stuff about earning
> millions)...
> I presume sendmail can do this as well in it's own mysterious way.

Nothing very mysterious about it - and rather well documented in the sendmail
FAQ (or cf/README).  Grep for genericstable.

-suresh