Re: Spam problem
If you are using pop3 check out mailfilter, you should find it on sourceforge. You have to specify the mails you do not want to recieve (using regexp's) and those mails will be deleted on the server before you download them to your machine. There is also an option to run it in test mode before you go fully *online* with it so you know which mails will be deleted. hth, regards, Sharukh. Rob 'Feztaa' Park muttered: > Hey guys, I've been having this terrible problem with email spam and I > was wondering if you guys have similar problems, and if so, what you do > about them. -- Dr. Sharukh K. R. Pavri Mumbai, India.
Why no new stable-branch version?
It has now been -- to the day -- exactly one year and three months since a stable-branch, general-release version of mutt has appeared. While the developer-branch continues to evolve (and is now at version 1.3.23i), the stable branch stagnates at 1.2.5i. Maybe there is, in fact, a good reason for this -- I don't know. But I (and lots of others, I'm sure) would like to know. Would someone from the mutt developer community mind giving a heads-up as to the philosophy or current thinking about this situation? It just seems to me that the longer it goes on, the more difficult it will be for stable-branch users to make the change-over to a mutt-1.4.0 or whatever, as so many things will have changed so radically. -- // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // PGP signature
Re: Why no new stable-branch version?
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 04:48:52AM -0500, Russell Hoover (dis)graced my inbox with: > It has now been -- to the day -- exactly one year and three months since > a stable-branch, general-release version of mutt has appeared. Wow. I wasn't even using linux then :) > Maybe there is, in fact, a good reason for this -- I don't know. But I > (and lots of others, I'm sure) would like to know. Lemme take a stab at it -- 1.2.5i is officially BugFree(tm), and the development branch has features and stuff that still need to have the bugs fixed. So when the development branch gets all fixed up real nice-like, they'll make it 1.4.0. > It just seems to me that the longer it goes on, the more difficult it will > be for stable-branch users to make the change-over to a mutt-1.4.0 or > whatever, as so many things will have changed so radically. Well, there was a time in your life when you were using another mail client, right? That means you had to migrate to mutt from something else at one point. I'm sure you'll be able to migrate from mutt 1.2 to 1.4 just fine. I don't think the differences will be as radical as you think. Besides, why not just use the devel version of mutt? I'm a happy 1.3.15i user, I've found no bugs thusfar. -- Rob 'Feztaa' Park [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- "Where would man be today if it wasn't for women? In the Garden of Eden eating watermelon and taking it easy." -- C Kennedy PGP signature
Re: Why no new stable-branch version?
On 2001-10-28 04:48:52 -0500, Russell Hoover wrote: >Would someone from the mutt developer community mind giving a >heads-up as to the philosophy or current thinking about this >situation? 1.3.23 is "pretty stable" now - which is why 1.3-branch announcements come on mutt-users, and why the 1.3 tar balls are not in the devel/ subdirectory. In fact, I believe that at least some areas of the code are considerably more bug-free than any 1.2 version (or even the 1.2 CVS, which has indeed some bugs fixed against 1.2.5, but hasn't been touched for quite some time). In fact, you could legitimately say that there is currently no true unstable branch - and that's basically because releasing a beta version (and, even more so) releasing a new stable version will inevitably uncover those bugs which don't come up with the usage patterns of developers (or the bold hearts doing beta tests). On the other hand, spending time on fixing problems in 1.2 which have been solved in 1.3 (possibly during major rewrites) would just be a waste of time, IMHO. -- Thomas Roesslerhttp://log.does-not-exist.org/ PGP signature
Re: Problem with subscribe lists ?
I am too embarrassed to tell you what the real problem was... but it's solved... Thanks for your time (sorry I wasted it) -- Regards Cliff On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 08:13:01PM +0200, Mathias Gygax wrote: > On Sam, Okt 27, 2001 at 06:14:48 +0200, Cliff Sarginson wrote: > > Hello, > > hi, > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > I would have though "xfree86.org" should catch this as a list but it > > does not. > > try > > subscribe newbie > or > subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
mailcap entry for type application/x-gzip not found
Hello. I'm using Mutt 1.3.23i on a Debian GNU/Linux (testing/unstable) platform. Mutt works fine and I love it as a MUA - couldn't switch to anything else (open to try others as well, of course). I actually haven't had any troubles with Mutt ever, but now I've confronted this "problem". Or an error, whatever. mailcap entry for type application/x-gzip not found When there's an attachment of that type. Still, I have the following lines in my ~/.muttrc; auto_view application/x-gunzip auto_view application/x-gzip Could someone point me to the direction, of how I am able to fix this. This isn't a serious trouble or nuisance or anything, but I'd still like Mutt to work like an angel. :-) So, thanks in advance for any insight. I'd appreciate it. -- Jussi Ekholm, "Everything is so fine it could be a little, ill flower don't let your mind take you in misery [EMAIL PROTECTED] all the feelings you're not so much pleased http://ekhowl.goa-head.org they're just to take you to sweet harmony"
Re: mailcap entry for type application/x-gzip not found
Jussi -- ...and then Jussi Ekholm said... % Hello. I'm using Mutt 1.3.23i on a Debian GNU/Linux (testing/unstable) Hello! % platform. Mutt works fine and I love it as a MUA - couldn't switch to % anything else (open to try others as well, of course). I actually Good :-) % haven't had any troubles with Mutt ever, but now I've confronted this % "problem". Or an error, whatever. % % mailcap entry for type application/x-gzip not found OK. So you need a mailcap entry. % % When there's an attachment of that type. Still, I have the following % lines in my ~/.muttrc; % % auto_view application/x-gunzip % auto_view application/x-gzip All this says is that you want to view x-gzip and x-gunzip messages, but it still doesn't tell mutt how to do it. % % Could someone point me to the direction, of how I am able to fix this. % This isn't a serious trouble or nuisance or anything, but I'd still % like Mutt to work like an angel. :-) So, thanks in advance for any % insight. I'd appreciate it. You need an entry in your .mailcap file (I *think*; check the manual) specifying how to call gzip or gunzip when such a message is seen. % % -- % Jussi Ekholm, "Everything is so fine it could be % a little, ill flower don't let your mind take you in misery % [EMAIL PROTECTED]all the feelings you're not so much pleased % http://ekhowl.goa-head.org they're just to take you to sweet harmony" :-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: mailcap entry for type application/x-gzip not found
Jussi Ekholm muttered: > Mutt works fine and I love it as a MUA - couldn't switch to > anything else :) > mailcap entry for type application/x-gzip not found > > When there's an attachment of that type. Still, I have the following > lines in my ~/.muttrc; > > auto_view application/x-gunzip > auto_view application/x-gzip So how does your /etc/mailcap or ~/.mailcap entry for application/x-gzip look like? HTH, Michael -- PGP-Key: http://www-stud.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/~tatgeml/public.key
Re: How to use smail v3.2 with mutt v1?
Neo Sze Wee [28/10/01 12:43 +]: > There is a problem. Mutt v1 will pass the mail to sendmail by default and > it also passes some arguments which smail, linked to sendamil, does not > understand. As a result, the mails are send to /ver/spool/smail/error > rather than /ver/spool/smail/input. Frankly, I am not sure smail v3.2 is > working properly in the first place. The smail binary that I have does not > have documentation and when I issue smail on the prompt after getting online > it says "smail [flags] address". You can control the flags mutt passes to smail with the sendmail_command variable in .muttrc -srs
Re: unable to post to aol
MuttER [28/10/01 00:00 -0500]: > addemdum to my own reply: I added a 'send-hook': > send-hook aol.com 'set envelope_from=yes' > and set the default to OFF. > This may be a problem with other locations, but I haven't found any, yet! Is there any particular reason why you dont put "set envelope_from" in your muttrc by default? Not all that many providers are idiotic enough to accept mail from unresolvable domains, these days. -srs
Re: Why no new stable-branch version?
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 11:04:20AM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote: : : On 2001-10-28 04:48:52 -0500, Russell Hoover wrote: : : >Would someone from the mutt developer community mind giving a : >heads-up as to the philosophy or current thinking about this : >situation? : : 1.3.23 is "pretty stable" now - which is why 1.3-branch : announcements come on mutt-users, and why the 1.3 tar balls are not : in the devel/ subdirectory. [...] : In fact, you could legitimately say that there is currently no true : unstable branch - and that's basically because releasing a beta : version (and, even more so) releasing a new stable version will : inevitably uncover those bugs which don't come up with the usage : patterns of developers (or the bold hearts doing beta tests). I wonder if Russell is thinking of something more akin to the FreeBSD development cycle where there are two branches: FreeBSD-CURRENT and FreeBSD-STABLE. FreeBSD-CURRENT is basically bleeding-edge development where all the wacky new stuff is started. FreeBSD-STABLE is slow-paced development, with more bug fixes and newer features that's gone through some testing in FreeBSD-CURRENT. The releases are created from the FreeBSD-STABLE branch around 3-4 times a year. However, I don't know if Mutt or the Mutt community is large enough to warrant this system. Waiting for such a long time between releases usually means that there's too much work and too few developers, or the next release is a huge radical departure from the previous release (features, code base, etc.). -- Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unable to post to aol
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 09:46:58PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > MuttER [28/10/01 00:00 -0500]: > > addemdum to my own reply: I added a 'send-hook': > > send-hook aol.com 'set envelope_from=yes' > > and set the default to OFF. > > This may be a problem with other locations, but I haven't found any, yet! > > Is there any particular reason why you dont put "set envelope_from" in your > muttrc by default? Not all that many providers are idiotic enough to accept > mail from unresolvable domains, these days. > ---end quoted text--- I have now. I don't know how I existed so long without it. It is unset by default and the ONLY problems I had posting before yesterday were with AOL. go figure! -- Pat Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 Registered at: http://counter.li.org
Re: unable to post to aol
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 12:32:37PM -0500, pat (dis)graced my inbox with: > On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 09:46:58PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > > MuttER [28/10/01 00:00 -0500]: > > > addemdum to my own reply: I added a 'send-hook': > > > send-hook aol.com 'set envelope_from=yes' > > > and set the default to OFF. > > > This may be a problem with other locations, but I haven't found any, yet! > > > > Is there any particular reason why you dont put "set envelope_from" in your > > muttrc by default? Not all that many providers are idiotic enough to accept > > mail from unresolvable domains, these days. > > > ---end quoted text--- > > I have now. I don't know how I existed so long without it. It is unset by > default and the ONLY problems I had posting before yesterday were with AOL. That's weird. I just looked through my .muttrc and it wasn't there, so it's been off the entire time I've been using mutt, but I've never had any problems. Can somebody describe that that variable is actually for? The man page is fairly vague about it, imo. -- Rob 'Feztaa' Park [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- "USA Today has come out with a new survey: Apparently, three out of four people make up 75 percent of the population." -- David Letterman
Re: unable to post to aol
On Sun, 28 Oct 2001, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote: [ references to set envelope_from=yes deleted ] > That's weird. I just looked through my .muttrc and it wasn't there, so > it's been off the entire time I've been using mutt, but I've never had > any problems. Can somebody describe that that variable is actually for? > The man page is fairly vague about it, imo. It sets your return path. If you mail from a resolvable, permanent host, the address that the mta deduces is usually right. However, I use IMAP, so I never work from the host that stores my mail. Delivery errors and such are always sent back to the envelope sender, not to the from address, so it pays to set this properly to the address you want errors to come to. The envelope sender gets set on the command line to the mta, iirc. In addition, many mta's (notable sourceforge's) require the envelope to be resolvable (I used to have this issue before enabling this option). cheers, wingo
asking to move messages into mbox
Hi Is there a way to make mutt stop asking me if I'd like to move my read messages into mbox when I switch from my inbox to another folder, but still have it ask when I quit mutt? Matt -- Matt Spong || [EMAIL PROTECTED] || AIM: Spong1027 || http://www.forkbomb.net "Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." -Benjamin Franklin PGP signature
Re: unable to post to aol
On Sun, Oct 27, 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > What is happening when I try to mail to someone at aol? > > I get the following error: > > Reporting-MTA: dns; localhost.localdomain > Arrival-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 04:18:02 + (UTC) > > Final-Recipient: rfc822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Action: failed > Status: 5.0.0 > Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host mailin-04.mx.aol.com[152.163.224.122] said: > 550 REQUESTED ACTION NOT TAKEN: DNS FAILURE > I AM able to post to other locations. The only location that I know I > cannot post to is AOL Try to send me a message to these accounts: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks Matej -- Matej Cepl, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 138 Highland Ave. #10, Somerville, Ma 02143, (617) 623-1488 It would be thought a hard government that should tax its people one tenth part. -- Benjamin Franklin
PGP
i'm trying to get mutt working with GnuPGP. mutt.org states: Go to the contrib subdirectory of the source tree. You'll find three files there, pgp2.rc, pgp5.rc, and gpg.rc. These files contain ready-to-use configurations for using mutt with pgp2, pgp5, and gpg. when i go to ftp.mutt.org, i'm presented with the following: ftp://ftp.mutt.org/ Name Type Size Time Freie_Software_und_IT_Sicherheit Directory 2001.04.20 09:18:00 GnuPG Directory 2001.06.19 13:02:00 fruis Directory 2001.04.20 09:18:00 gcrypt Directory 2001.06.19 13:02:00 mutt Directory 2001.10.10 12:12:00 people Directory 2001.04.23 18:48:00 pub Directory 2001.04.23 18:48:00 welcome.msg MSG 1 KB 2001.04.04 14:34:00 when i click on on anything, it presents me with the exact same directory structure. it's been doing this for 2 days now. anyone know where i can get a copy of gpg.rc? thanks. -- ) ,_),_) (-(__ |_ _ _ |/ ) | |(_)(_ |\ ( \_, ___ | http://www.exitwound.org : hard to find | ___ | A cynic is a person searching for an honest | | man, with a stolen lantern. -- Edgar A. | | Shoaff| ___ -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- | Version: 3.1 | | GJ/IT d- s: a C+++>$ UL 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--
Re: PGP
download the source. it's in the contrib/ directory. dan * Stephen E. Hargrove ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > when i click on on anything, it presents me with the exact same directory structure. > it's been doing this for 2 days now. anyone know where i can get a copy of gpg.rc?
Re: Console mail notifiers/displayers
At 23:19 -0500 25 Oct 2001, I wrote: > That's pretty much how I use it as well. I've patched mutt so that > the functionality of the standard versions $mark_old is split into two > variables: > The patch (and a couple others I've done) is available from my > (currently *very* minimal) mutt page: > > http://pug.schrab.com/aaron/mutt/ > > Current version up there was originally against 1.3.8, but it should > apply cleanly up to 1.3.23. There's a minor issue applying against the > current CVS version, but it's pretty easy to fix. I'll probably put a > new version up sometime over the weekend. Got it put up there just before my deadline. :) > Of course, I haven't done extensive testing of it in a while; I just While I was at it, I also did some testing. Everything I tried still worked properly. -- Aaron Schrab [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.execpc.com/~aarons/ "If you want to travel around the world and be invited to speak at a lot of different places, just write a Unix operating system." -- Linus Torvalds
Re: Spam problem
Thus spake Rob 'Feztaa' Park ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Hey guys, I've been having this terrible problem with email spam and I > was wondering if you guys have similar problems, and if so, what you do > about them. I started using SpamAssassin a few weeks ago and have been very happy with it. I finally did a little write-up of how I have things going if you are interested: http://codesorcery.net/docs/spamtricks.html Please let me know if you'd like any clarifications. -- Justin R. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP/GnuPG Key ID 0xC9C40C31 (preferred) PGP signature
