Re: display proces id - format string %$
* Sven Guckes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-03 21:03:16 +0200]: > * Dave Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-03 15:43]: > > set status_format="Hello, I am mutt and my PID is `echo $PPID`" > > and variations on that theme? > > have you tried that? i dont think so. ;-) Then you think wrong. I don't post things I've not tried. You're welcome to think thru why I mentioned "variations on that theme". -- Dave Pearson: | mutt.octet.filter - autoview octet-streams http://www.davep.org/ | mutt.vcard.filter - autoview simple vcards Mutt: | muttrc2html - muttrc -> HTML utility http://www.davep.org/mutt/ | muttrc.sl - Jed muttrc mode
Mac Outlook Exchange client problem
Hi. I'm getting a bounce from a client who is using mac outlook exchange. My mail is not showing up properly. > This message uses a character set that is not supported by the > Internet Service. To view the original message content, open the > attached message. If the text doesn't display correctly, save the > attachment to disk, and then open it using a viewer that can display > the original character set. > <> I recently unset the two .muttrc variables below. Also, I've got "set allow_8bit. set allow_8bit # set mime_forward # unset mime_forward_decode Any ideas on how to avoid this problem? Cheers Rory -- Rory Campbell-Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
WG: IMAP Connection to Exchange
> Hi ! > Is it possible to read Mailinglist of public folders on a > Exchange Server with Mutt > > __ > Nik Engel NETWAYS GmbH > Senior Systems Engineer Deutschherrnstr. 47a > Fon.0911/92885-13 D-90429 Nürnberg > Fax.0911/92885-33 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netways.de >
Re: language-problem
* Heiko Heil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 06:55]: > > > hh@server:~ > locale > > > LANG=de_DE > > > [snipped] > > I read this to be the locale of your server. > > I guess the locale of your laptop looks like LANG=de_DE@euro. > Right. > > 2 reasons I can think of: > > 1. check /usr/lib/locale directories having both de_DE and de_DE@euro > hh@server:~ > ls -d /usr/lib/locale/de_DE* > /usr/lib/locale/de_DE /usr/lib/locale/de_DE.utf8 /usr/lib/locale/de_DE@euro > hh@laptop:~ > ls -d /usr/lib/locale/de_DE* > /usr/lib/locale/de_DE /usr/lib/locale/de_DE.utf8 /usr/lib/locale/de_DE@euro > > 2. check both LANGUAGE variables > Mutt is still running in English language... $ LANG=de_DE $ export LANG $ mutt -F /dev/null -f /dev/null mutt gives me this mini-help now: q:Ende d:Lösch. u:Behalten s:Speichern m:Senden r:Antw. g:Antw.alle ?:Hil Does it work for you now, too? Sven ["lernt Englisch!"]
Re: automating move of folders, imap to imap
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 11:47:51AM -0600, David Champion wrote: > > Err... why are you using Mutt? Why not just set up an NFS share or FTP > > access, and just *copy* the files from one server to the other? > > You answered this yourself Reason is that the destination server doesn't store IMAP folders in mbox format, plus it doesn't mount NFS (for other reasons). > > Or is there a specific reason you need to use an MUA to do it? I can't > > think of one good reason, unless of course you don't have anything but > > IMAP access to each server The CGI/Perl script is meant to be generic and run by the user, and IMAP is the only way to access the server. > behalf of my users). With access to one hierarchy of mboxes, I use a > command like this to transfer them all to an IMAP server: > > cd .../path/to/folders > find . -type f -print | while read folder; do > directory=`dirname $folder` > folder=`basename $folder` > mutt -f $directory/$folder -e "push >'~Aimap://SERVER/$directory/$folderPASSWORD'" > echo > echo "$directory/$folder is transferred." > done Thanks. Though I was looking for a better way, knowing that someone else has done it before is good enough. :) > It's trivial to extend that to handle multiple users, if you know > their passwords. If you don't know their passwords, then it's probably > possible to arrange a back-channel transfer not involving IMAP directly. The passwords on either side is the same, so shouldn't be a problem. Thanks everyone. Robert
IMAP Connection to Exchange
Hi ! Is it possible to read Mailinglist of public folders on a Exchange Server with Mutt __ Nik Engel NETWAYS GmbH Senior Systems Engineer Deutschherrnstr. 47a Fon.0911/92885-13 D-90429 Nürnberg Fax.0911/92885-33 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netways.de
Re: copy+save_name + IN.LIST->+listname
* Rob 'Feztaa' Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 03:42]: > #!/bin/bash > for i in ~/mail/* > do > i=$(basename $i) > echo folder-hook =$i \"set record=\'=$i\'\" > done > > then simply source the output of this script. > It might even be simpler than that, though ;) exactly - "basename" is not required ! #!/bin/bash cd ~/mail for i in * do echo folder-hook =$i \"set record=\'=$i\'\" done still - all this is completely superfluous. you see, this folder-hook gets activated once you switch to, say, folder "=foo". then the message you save gets saved to =foo, too. so when you exit from the folder then mutt will ask you whether you want to move the read messages from the current folder to the current folder? that's a move of messages within the current folder. what gives? i understand that you want to save outbound mails - and this is controlled by the variable "save_name". like i said before, mails to "listname@domain" will get saved to the folder "+listname". so all you need to do is filter all mails that go via listname@domain to +listname - and that's it. there is *nothing* to set besides "save_name" - no folder-hooks, no "record", no nothing. ;-) and you could still use "record" for moving those read mails to another folder on exit from mutt. and if you want to filter mails via listname@domain to a folder named +IN.LIST then all it takes to combine +IN.LIST with +listname is a symlink! $ cd ~/mail; ln -s IN.LIST listname try it! Sven === $ agrep -d '^$' MUTT ~/.procmailrc :0 c * ^[EMAIL PROTECTED] IN.MUTT # 000710 - added yahoogroups.com :0 * ^TOmutt(-dev|-users)?@.*(cs.hmc.edu|mutt.org|yahoogroups.com) IN.MUTT
Re: IMAP Subscription and Mailboxes
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:00:50PM -0500, David T-G wrote: > % Is there a way to tell mutt to either: > % a) use my IMAP subscriptions as my 'mailboxes' (to check for new mail) > % b) tell mutt to consider all mailboxes as 'mailboxes' > No, not really. :-( > % I don't like having to list all of my 50+ folders, to which procmail writes, > % just to have it tell me if there's new mail in them. > So whip up a little script that goes through your procmail rules and > grabs where you write and source that in your mailboxes line. My procmail rules use regexes to generate folder names on the fly! Oh well. Maybe I'll just try and putz with the mutt source. -- rjbs msg26659/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: language-problem
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 12:46:20PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > $ LANG=de_DE > $ export LANG > $ mutt -F /dev/null -f /dev/null > > mutt gives me this mini-help now: > q:Ende d:Lösch. u:Behalten s:Speichern m:Senden r:Antw. g:Antw.alle ?:Hil > > Does it work for you now, too? No :-( I noticed another inconsistency: The result of the "mutt -v"-command is in English. When I type "mutt -v" on my laptop I get a German text. -- Cheers, Heiko Heil
Re: symlinks in ~/Mail
* Volker Kuhlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 07:21]: > As to my experience (with procmail filtering), it is unreliable to > expect that the send-msg-to-list address appears in To: or Cc:. so this list distributes messages when the list is in the BCC header? well, blame the list admin then! depending on your MDA you can still filter on the Delivered-To line. but that's a local problem which you can probably solve yourself. > > besides, when you have "set save_name" then mails > > sent to listname@domain get saved in +listname. > > and if you need a different name for +listname, > > well, there's "ln -s" to create symlinks! > Hell no, what a pollution in my mail directory > tree! Remember: some dozen lists. i'm on about 50 mailing lists and I do use symlinks for that. mind you, for the maillists i only require some dozen. and i almost never see the "clutter" as my shell's globbing allows to leave them out in a very simple way: ls *(^@) this lists all the non-symlinks. now, that's not so hard, is it? > I never have problems with procmail, just with dumb MUAs... :) .. and with problems of unnecessairly complicated setups. ;-) PS: Volker - you do not seem to attribute quoted text. that is bad. especially on mailing lists. Sven
Re: language-problem
[Heiko Heil is having problems with mutt speaking English even though Heiko's locale is German.] Just a thought: You do use the same (type of) shell on both machines, right? If not, check that you are using the correct terminology for the environment variables. hth -- Martin | PGP/GPG: | There is no cow Karlsson | 9C924660 |on the ice. msg26662/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: IMAP Subscription and Mailboxes
Ricardo -- ...and then Ricardo SIGNES said... % % On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:00:50PM -0500, David T-G wrote: ... % > % I don't like having to list all of my 50+ folders, to which procmail writes, % > % just to have it tell me if there's new mail in them. % > So whip up a little script that goes through your procmail rules and % > grabs where you write and source that in your mailboxes line. % % My procmail rules use regexes to generate folder names on the fly! Hmmm... So have procmail generate the folder name and then hand it off to a script which checks a list to see if it's known and adds it if it isn't and then have your mutt mailboxes script utilize that file, mebbe. Short of that, the only thing of which I can think is to have a directory or a file name mask for all of your list folders, perhaps acheived through symlinks, so that you can use a shell expression in mutt's mailboxes line. % % Oh well. Maybe I'll just try and putz with the mutt source. That's always nice, too. Let us know if you come up with anything! % % -- % rjbs 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! msg26663/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mac Outlook Exchange client problem
Rory -- ...and then Rory Campbell-Lange said... % % Hi. I'm getting a bounce from a client who is using mac outlook % exchange. My mail is not showing up properly. Yeah, but we need more details. % % > This message uses a character set that is not supported by the % > Internet Service. To view the original message content, open the % > attached message. If the text doesn't display correctly, save the % > attachment to disk, and then open it using a viewer that can display % > the original character set. % > <> So it sounds like you have a MIME attachment that the Mac client can't read. What is the format of your mail messages? % % I recently unset the two .muttrc variables below. Also, I've got "set % allow_8bit. % % set allow_8bit % # set mime_forward % # unset mime_forward_decode % % Any ideas on how to avoid this problem? Well, you could always quit corresponding with that client ;-) Better yet, give us some more detail and perhaps even a sample offending message. % Cheers % Rory % -- % Rory Campbell-Lange % <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> % 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! msg26664/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mac Outlook Exchange client problem
first thought: why does anyone send problems with Outlook to this list? * Rory Campbell-Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 09:09]: > I'm getting a bounce from a client who is using mac > outlook exchange. My mail is not showing up properly. > > This message uses a character set that is > > not supported by the Internet Service. > Any ideas on how to avoid this problem? well - *is* this a mutt problem? perhaps this is an Outlook problem sent back to a mutt user? *shrug* which kind of character set did you send then? Sven -- Note to experienced users: Please don't encourage anti-support behavior. Don't try to answer questions from users who don't provide the necessary information. Guessing what they did is an incredible waste of time. (DJB)
Re: Feature Request
begin quoting what Sven Guckes said on Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:39:43AM +0200: > > feature request denied. > > macro index c ! That breaks "? for list" functionality. It would be better to assign it to another key: macro index I "!\r" Then get used to using "I" when you want it. msg2/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: language-problem
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 02:46:23PM +0200, Martin Karlsson wrote: > [Heiko Heil is having problems with mutt speaking English even > though Heiko's locale is German.] > Just a thought: You do use the same (type of) shell on both > machines, right? If not, check that you are using the correct > terminology for the environment variables. I'm using bash on both machines. Before starting mutt I check the environment variables (with echo). I've tried several combinations: de_DE, de_DE@euro, de_DE.ISO-8859-1, de_DE.ISO-8859-15, ... Without success :-( -- Cheers, Heiko Heil
Re: Feature Request
* Shawn McMahon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [04-04-02 08:22]: > begin quoting what Sven Guckes said on Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:39:43AM +0200: > > > > feature request denied. > > > > macro index c ! > > That breaks "? for list" functionality. It would be better to assign > it to another key: > > macro index I "!\r" > > Then get used to using "I" when you want it. The request was: Feature request. It would be nice and timesaving (for me, at least) if would default to ! when where was not a folder containing New Mail. Neither suggestion satisfies the request... for a default action, a suggested destination when no folder containing New Mail was available. tks, -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 Registered at: http://counter.li.org
Re: language-problem
* Heiko Heil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 15:24:07 +0200]: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 02:46:23PM +0200, Martin Karlsson wrote: > > [Heiko Heil is having problems with mutt speaking English even > > though Heiko's locale is German.] > > Just a thought: You do use the same (type of) shell on both > > machines, right? If not, check that you are using the correct > > terminology for the environment variables. > > I'm using bash on both machines. Before starting mutt I check the > environment variables (with echo). Are the variables "export"ed? Start a new bash, and check if the variables are still there. Nicolas
Re: language-problem
* Heiko Heil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 11:54]: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 12:46:20PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > > $ LANG=de_DE > > $ export LANG > > $ mutt -F /dev/null -f /dev/null > > > > mutt gives me this mini-help now: > > q:Ende d:Lösch. u:Behalten s:Speichern... > > Does it work for you now, too? > No :-( > > I noticed another inconsistency: The result > of the "mutt -v"-command is in English. > When I type "mutt -v" on my > laptop I get a German text. inconsistency? you use two different binaries on two different machines and you find *inconsistency*? STOP THE PRESS! ALARM THE MEDIA! jeez - what's next? now, are we trying to solve a problem on your laptop - or on the other computer? come on - give more info! how did you install mutt - from source? deb? rpm? where does the binary get its locales? $ mutt -v | grep PKG PKGDATADIR="/home/guckes/share/mutt" $ cd ~/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/ $ ls mutt.mo guckes@debian:~$ locate mutt.mo | grep /de/ /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/mutt.mo Does your system have those, too? Sven [who thinks that Krauts should learn English - period.]
Re: language-problem
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 04:04:21PM +0200, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote: > Are the variables "export"ed? > Start a new bash, and check if the variables are still there. Yes, they are exported. Other programms like gnupg are running in German language whithout persuasion. -- Cheers, Heiko Heil
Re: language-problem
* Nicolas Rachinsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 14:04]: > > > [Heiko Heil is having problems with mutt speaking > > > English even though Heiko's locale is German.] > > > Just a thought: You do use the same (type of) shell on both > > > machines, right? If not, check that you are using the correct > > > terminology for the environment variables. > > I'm using bash on both machines. Before starting mutt > > I check the environment variables (with echo). > Are the variables "export"ed? i did not dare ask... > Start a new bash, and check if > the variables are still there. no need to start a new shell, though: bash> export|grep LANG Sven
Re: Can not input 8bit chars in command line
Thanks for all your help. I've got the answer - 'unset meta_key'. Setting meta_key will strip the 8th bit of any 8bit key value, which is both the key value of alt-key and mbyte characters. best regards, charlie On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 10:49:45PM +0800, ¬ö¬K¿³/Charles Jie wrote: > Hi, > > I can read and write mail of 8bit charset (Traditional Chinese) in mutt. > But I can not input them in mutt's command line - such as To:, Subject:, > Search, Alias (the characters from XIM are stripped of the 8th bit). > > Is there a setting to enable 8bit characters in command line at bottom? > > thanks, > best regards, > charlie
Re: `echo $PPID` - not with Bourne Shell!
* Dave Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 08:56]: > * Sven Guckes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-03 21:03:16 +0200]: > > * Dave Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-03 15:43]: > > > set status_format="Hello, I am mutt and my PID is `echo $PPID`" > > > and variations on that theme? > > have you tried that? i dont think so. ;-) > Then you think wrong. I don't post things I've > not tried. You're welcome to think thru > why I mentioned "variations on that theme". ok - good! I suppose you are using a non-bourne shell as EXECSHELL, are you? it might be /bin/sh on your system - but it is probably linked to bash? so my question is - have you tried accessing PPID with /bin/sh on a system which uses *the* Bounce Shell? Sven -- $ mutt -v |grep -i shell EXECSHELL="/bin/sh" $ ls -l /bin/sh ... 95316 Dec 11 06:02 /bin/sh
Re: language-problem
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 04:19:54PM +0200, German Kraut Sven Guckes wrote: > [...] > come on - give more info! > how did you install mutt - from source? deb? rpm? ^^^ > where does the binary get its locales? > > $ mutt -v | grep PKG > PKGDATADIR="/home/guckes/share/mutt" result: PKGDATADIR="/usr/local/share/mutt" This directory doesn't exist on both machines! > $ cd ~/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/ > $ ls > mutt.mo > > guckes@debian:~$ locate mutt.mo | grep /de/ > /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/mutt.mo > > Does your system have those, too? mutt.mo only exists on the laptop /usr/local/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/mutt.mo But during the configure-make-make install-process I get no error message! > Sven [who thinks that Krauts should learn English - period.] ^^^ IMHO my mutt should learn German! ;-) -- Cheers, Heiko Heil
Re: language-problem -> no locales files foo.mo
* Heiko Heil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 14:56]: > German Kraut Sven Guckes wrote: > > come on - give more info! > > how did you install mutt - from source? deb? rpm? > ^^^ > > where does the binary get its locales? > > $ mutt -v | grep PKG > > PKGDATADIR="/home/guckes/share/mutt" please don't underline text - this often does not work out when quoting text. instead, repeat text. "yes, i installed mutt from source." that'll do. > result: > PKGDATADIR="/usr/local/share/mutt" > This directory doesn't exist on both machines! what about /usr/share/locale then? > > guckes@debian:~$ locate mutt.mo | grep /de/ > > /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/mutt.mo > mutt.mo only exists on the laptop > /usr/local/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/mutt.mo > But during the configure-make-make > install-process I get no error message! check the logs then. did you install with "--disable-nls"? anyway - install it again. does the problem persist? > > Sven [Krauts should learn English - period.] > IMHO my mutt should learn German! ;-) and next thing you know it'll be "handbuch handbuch" instead of "man man". no thanks. (you English-only types are not supposed to understand this - it's a Kraut thing.) Sven [German Kraut]
Re: display proces id - using PPID from EXECSHELL
* Rob 'Feztaa' Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-03 22:46]: > > > can mutt display its own process id? > > * Dave Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-03 15:43]: > > > set status_format="Hello, I am mutt and my PID is `echo $PPID`" > > > and variations on that theme? > > have you tried that? i dont think so. ;-) > It works. I've tried it. well - which shell does your mutt use then? the configure script has this: --with-exec-shell=SHELLSpecify alternate shell (ONLY if /bin/sh is broken) I suppose that /bin/sh is no Bourne shell on your system. Sven
Re: language-problem -> no locales files foo.mo
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 05:30:35PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > and next thing you know it'll be > "handbuch handbuch" instead of "man man". > no thanks. shouldn't that be "hand hand"? (man is a shortcut for manual) ...i'm not really that funny but i try... > (you English-only types are not supposed > to understand this - it's a Kraut thing.) believe it or not some of us english (and americans too!) can muddle through another language too. > Sven [German Kraut] -peter [american swiss] -- Peter Abplanalp Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: pgp.mit.edu msg26678/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
send-hook and set
i think i know the answer to this but i wanted to make sure... if i have a send-hook: send-hook somelist set pgp_autosign=no it changes the value of pgp_autosign from there on out, yes? it is not a temporary item just for this send afterwhich the global value of pgp_autosign returns. that is why when i asked about send hooks everyone gave me two send-hooks instead of one. -- Peter Abplanalp Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: pgp.mit.edu msg26679/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: send-hook and set
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 08:51:31AM -0700, Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > i think i know the answer to this but i wanted to make sure... > > if i have a send-hook: > > send-hook somelist set pgp_autosign=no > > it changes the value of pgp_autosign from there on out, yes? it is not > a temporary item just for this send afterwhich the global value of > pgp_autosign returns. that is why when i asked about send hooks everyone > gave me two send-hooks instead of one. correct. that's why you always want to define a 'send-hook . set pgp_autosign=yes' - it'll define a default, when no other hooks match. :) -- Dan Boger Linux MVP brainbench.com msg26680/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: send-hook and set
* Peter T. Abplanalp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 10:51]: > i think i know the answer to this but i wanted to make sure... > > if i have a send-hook: > > send-hook somelist set pgp_autosign=no > > it changes the value of pgp_autosign from there on out, yes? it is > not a temporary item just for this send afterwhich the global value of > pgp_autosign returns. that is why when i asked about send hooks > everyone gave me two send-hooks instead of one. Correct. That's why almost all examples like this also include something along the lines of: send-hook . set pgp_autosign=yes And then have send-hooks for specific exceptions to the general rule. (darren) -- Humor distorts nothing, and only false gods are laughed off their earthly pedestals. -- Agnes Repplier
Re: send-hook and set
Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > i think i know the answer to this but i wanted to make sure... > > if i have a send-hook: > > send-hook somelist set pgp_autosign=no > > it changes the value of pgp_autosign from there on out, yes? it is not > a temporary item just for this send afterwhich the global value of > pgp_autosign returns. that is why when i asked about send hooks everyone > gave me two send-hooks instead of one. i believe so. so you'd want something like: send-hook . set pgp_autosign send-hook somelist unset pgp_autosign -- Will Yardley input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . >
Re: language-problem -> no locales files foo.mo
On Thu, 04 Apr 2002, Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > believe it or not some of us english (and americans too!) > can muddle through another language too. > > > Sven [German Kraut] > > -peter [american swiss] http://babelfish.altavista.com :) -Tim [human equivalent of american curbside terrier] msg26683/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: send-hook and set
Peter --
...and then Peter T. Abplanalp said...
%
% i think i know the answer to this but i wanted to make sure...
Hey, you have the manual; what more do you need? ;-)
%
% if i have a send-hook:
%
% send-hook somelist set pgp_autosign=no
%
% it changes the value of pgp_autosign from there on out, yes? it is not
Yep. Of course, you've already seen that from others.
% a temporary item just for this send afterwhich the global value of
% pgp_autosign returns. that is why when i asked about send hooks everyone
% gave me two send-hooks instead of one.
More importantly, multiple send-hooks can be applied to a single message,
so mutt goes through them all applying everything that matches. If you
had
send-hook . set pgp_autosign=yes
send-hook aol.com set pgp_autosign=no
send-hook dad set pgp_autosign=yes
and you sent mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] then pgp_autosign would be yes.
Contrast this to an fcc-hook or a folder-hook, only one of which can be
applied; mutt goes through the list and stops at the first match, so your
default case -- if you even need one -- is at the bottom.
%
% --
% Peter Abplanalp
%
% Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
% PGP: pgp.mit.edu
HTH & HAND
:-D
[American {German,Italian,French,English,AndThenSome}]
--
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!
msg26684/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: `echo $PPID` - not with Bourne Shell!
Sven -- ...and then Sven Guckes said... % ... % system which uses *the* Bounce Shell? Hey, where do I get this shell? Is it for use only on mail servers which refuse mail, or on any mail server to be called when you want to refuse a single piece of mail? How does it's scripting language look? *grin* % % Sven % % -- % $ mutt -v |grep -i shell % EXECSHELL="/bin/sh" % $ ls -l /bin/sh % ... 95316 Dec 11 06:02 /bin/sh :-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!
Re: language-problem -> no locales files foo.mo
hh@server:~>export LANG=kraut On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 05:30:35PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > what about /usr/share/locale then? ls: /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/mutt.mo: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden > check the logs then. did you install with "--disable-nls"? No, I didn't. > anyway - install it again. does the problem persist? Yes. Here is an output from the make && make install-process: -8< make all-recursive make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/mutt-1.3.28' Making all in m4 make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/mutt-1.3.28/m4' make[2]: Nothing to be done for `all'. make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/mutt-1.3.28/m4' Making all in po make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/mutt-1.3.28/po' file=./`echo de | sed 's,.*/,,'`.gmo \ && rm -f $file && : --statistics -o $file de.po ... --8<--- > > > Sven [Krauts should learn English - period.] > > IMHO my mutt should learn German! ;-) > and next thing you know it'll be "handbuch handbuch" instead of "man > man". no thanks. I love silly translations. Yesterday I worked with a german Red Hat-distribution (user elvis): Gnome created an icon called "Heimat von elvis" ;-) Workaround: I have copied the mutt.mo-file into my locales and now I can use mutt in German language :-) -- Cheers, Heiko Heil
Re: IMAP Subscription and Mailboxes
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 07:57:51AM -0500, David T-G wrote: > ...and then Ricardo SIGNES said... > % My procmail rules use regexes to generate folder names on the fly! > > Hmmm... So have procmail generate the folder name and then hand it off > to a script which checks a list to see if it's known and adds it if it > isn't and then have your mutt mailboxes script utilize that file, mebbe. I'm thinking I'll make a Makefile for my .muttrc. It's getting scary, anyway. > % Oh well. Maybe I'll just try and putz with the mutt source. > That's always nice, too. Let us know if you come up with anything! I will. But expect nothing! -- rjbs msg26687/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: French accentuated letters in 1.3.28i -> stable snapshot
* On 2002.04.03, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, * "Simon White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 03-Apr-02 at 16:47, Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > > but maybe it's just that our Solaris machines > > don't have proper locales installed. actually, > > the local installation drives me up the wall. > > this alone it's a good reason to switch to Linux. > > We run Linux on Sparc boxes and are happier with them than when they ran > SunOS5.8. I run Solaris on my PC and am much happier with it than when it ran Linux. But OS advocacy doesn't address mutt questions. Chersets work fine on Solaris 8, with Sun's iconv, even, last time I checked. Unfortunately, I can't investigate this further at the moment, as I don't use 8 any longer. But I have had success, for what that's worth. (I'm not aware of any problems with iconv or locales on Solaris 8. Some charset names differ in Solaris from Linux, but I believe those have been accomodated with aliases, as they're not broken, just different.) -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Re: `echo $PPID` - not with Bourne Shell!
* Sven Guckes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 16:34:49 +0200]: > I suppose you are using a non-bourne shell as EXECSHELL, are you? it might > be /bin/sh on your system - but it is probably linked to bash? Yes, I'm using bash. > so my question is - have you tried accessing PPID with /bin/sh on a system > which uses *the* Bounce Shell? Congratulations, you've figured out the "variations on a theme" part. -- Dave Pearson: | mutt.octet.filter - autoview octet-streams http://www.davep.org/ | mutt.vcard.filter - autoview simple vcards Mutt: | muttrc2html - muttrc -> HTML utility http://www.davep.org/mutt/ | muttrc.sl - Jed muttrc mode
Re: send-hook and set
Hi, * David T-G [04/04/02 18:48:49] wrote: > More importantly, multiple send-hooks can be applied to a single message, > so mutt goes through them all applying everything that matches. If you > had > send-hook . set pgp_autosign=yes > send-hook aol.com set pgp_autosign=no > send-hook dad set pgp_autosign=yes > and you sent mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] then pgp_autosign would be yes. > Contrast this to an fcc-hook or a folder-hook, only one of which can be > applied; mutt goes through the list and stops at the first match, so your > default case -- if you even need one -- is at the bottom. Are you really sure about that one? I currently have: ,[ ~/.mutt/setup/folder-hooks ]- | | folder-hook . 'my_hdr Reply-To: Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' | [...] | folder-hook =IN.mutt-users 'my_hdr Reply-To: mutt-users <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' | `- ... in that order and it works. It shouldn't work if you were right, because 'folder-hook .' is supposed to always match on entering a folder. Read this one before? : ,[ ~/public_html/manual.txt ]- | | If a mailbox matches multiple | folder-hook's, they are executed in the order given in the muttrc. | `- Cheers, Rocco. msg26690/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: language-problem -> no locales files foo.mo
Hi, * Heiko Heil [04/04/02 19:00:52] wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 05:30:35PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > > and next thing you know it'll be "handbuch handbuch" instead of "man > > man". no thanks. Hey, sometimes it would be really funny! Think of this one: 'katze < mahlzeit > katzeklo' ;-)) > I love silly translations. Yesterday I worked with a german Red > Hat-distribution (user elvis): Gnome created an icon called "Heimat von > elvis" ;-) Why not: "Gnome hat eine Ikone namens 'Heimat von Elvis' erstellt"? ;-) But seriously: I hate things like that because I got used to the English versions -- which more people know than the translated ones. So asking for help with english error messages makes things much easier. To give just one more example in German: routing table is one of the terms which should *never* be translated to something like "Leitwerttabelle" (don't know when I heard this one, but it took some time to find out what was meant). Cheers, Rocco. msg26691/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: send-hook and set
Rocco, et al -- ...and then Rocco Rutte said... % % Hi, Hi! % % * David T-G [04/04/02 18:48:49] wrote: ... % > Contrast this to an fcc-hook or a folder-hook, only one of which can be % > applied; mutt goes through the list and stops at the first match, so your % > default case -- if you even need one -- is at the bottom. % % Are you really sure about that one? I currently have: Uh, well, I was... % ... % ,[ ~/public_html/manual.txt ]- % | % | If a mailbox matches multiple % | folder-hook's, they are executed in the order given in the muttrc. I stand corrected. I also stand to not try to figure out which way each hook falls since I don't want to read the manual right now :-) % | % `- % % Cheers, Rocco. 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! msg26692/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
send-hook and setting To: header
I'm on a mailing list with an email address of A. The same mailing list also works with an alternate email address of B. Both addresses are listed in the "lists" command. And doing 'L' (list-reply) generates the appropriate "To: " or "To: " headers. I'd like to change this slightly. On messages sent to the mailing list via the alternate address B, I want 'L' to generate the headers using the main address A, i.e. "To: ". Messages sent to the main address A are fine and can be left alone. I'm guessing a send-hook will work, but I haven't been able to divinate the right combination. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. -- Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: send-hook and setting To: header
Eugene Lee wrote: > I'd like to change this slightly. On messages sent to the mailing list > via the alternate address B, I want 'L' to generate the headers using > the main address A, i.e. "To: ". Messages sent to the main address A > are fine and can be left alone. I'm guessing a send-hook will work, but > I haven't been able to divinate the right combination. You can't do this in Mutt. If you really want to munge the headers, your best bet is to do it with procmail before the mail gets delivered. send-hook only allows you to change settings, not edit the recipient list.
PGP Signing and Password
Hi all I have just got GNUPG working with Mutt, and since I am still new to Mutt and PGP I am very impressed. However by default (my choice), I now sign all outgoing emails (including this one I hope), I have increased the timeout threshold of mutt remembering my secret key password so that it doesn't prompt me for each email (just every few hours). But I was wondering how other people do this and sign all outgoinging emails. Do you just accept that you need to enter your password every so often, and "thats life" so to speak? Thanks for any help offered. - Dean msg26695/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Sending mail to a recipient
Me again! :) Sorry if my previous email appeared as a thread to another message, there is a reason though, which is why I have this question. In Mutt, quite often I want to send an email to someone, but I want to be able to highlight an email from them, and click "Send it to this person, but it isn't a reply" - if that makes sense. I am just lazy for not wanting to have to alias everyone that I am writing to, but my emails usually start by going into the folder for the person that I am writing to and clicking an old email from them, then pressing "r" which adds in the in-reply-to line in the header. I then manually "E"dit the email headers and remove the reference to the reply. There must be an easier way - anyone? :) Thanks again Dean msg26696/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
gnupg signing w/ mutt
ok, i've spent a number of hours over the last two days going over the list archives for mutt and gnupg reading up on the conventions for signing messages. it is now my understanding that there are 3 ways to sign a message: pgp/mime, ascii armor, and application/pgp. i'm not certain on the terminology for the last two or even that there is a difference between them. might someone enlighten me? given the above, i know mutt handles pgp/mime natively and that it can do application/pgp with the pgp_create_traditional. my problem is that neither of these formats appears to work if the recipient is using outlook. btw - the outlook is set up to use the g-data gnu-plugin. is there a way to get mutt to use ascii armor and will that be viewable by my outlook user? will the ascii armor work for encryption as well? if you care, i am trying to set up a secure email route route from me to my accountant who uses outlook. can anyone give me some pointers for setting mutt/gnupg up to work with an outlook user? thanks. -- Peter Abplanalp Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: pgp.mit.edu msg26697/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: PGP Signing and Password
Hi, * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [04/04/02 23:04:41] wrote: > I have just got GNUPG working with Mutt, and since I am still new to > Mutt and PGP I am very impressed. Fine. > However by default (my choice), I now sign all outgoing emails > (including this one I hope), I have increased the timeout threshold of > mutt remembering my secret key password so that it doesn't prompt me for > each email (just every few hours). > But I was wondering how other people do this and sign all outgoinging > emails. Do you just accept that you need to enter your password every > so often, and "thats life" so to speak? I type it every time because it's a security feature and I try to store passwords in my mind only. I do not even want to store it somewhere in memory and/or swap. Typing more often also makes me forget it less often... ;-) Cheers, Rocco. msg26698/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: send-hook and set
Hi, * David T-G [04/04/02 21:59:38] wrote: > Rocco, et al -- > ...and then Rocco Rutte said... > % * David T-G [04/04/02 18:48:49] wrote: > % > Contrast this to an fcc-hook or a folder-hook, only one of which can be > % > applied; mutt goes through the list and stops at the first match, so your > % > default case -- if you even need one -- is at the bottom. > % > % Are you really sure about that one? I currently have: > Uh, well, I was... ... posting/writing before the first coffee? ;-) Don't answer, I know such situations... ;-) Cheers, Rocco. msg26699/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > > given the above, i know mutt handles pgp/mime natively and that it can > do application/pgp with the pgp_create_traditional. my problem is > that neither of these formats appears to work if the recipient is > using outlook. btw - the outlook is set up to use the g-data > gnu-plugin. is there a way to get mutt to use ascii armor and will > that be viewable by my outlook user? will the ascii armor work for > encryption as well? you want to use pgp_create_traditional, but you want the content type to be set as ascii text. so basically, you would need to run either 1.2.5 or 1.3.x with the pgp_outlook_compat patch (i think there's a version for 1.2.5, which it looks like you're running currently), or the cvs version, which (as you can see) can create a traditional message in a way that will be read by MUAs other than mutt. - -- Will Yardley input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: public key: http://infinitejazz.net/will/pgp/gpg.asc iD8DBQE8rMqhswHW5vg5XAIRAi87AJ0TfPST/Tb/iXZEpBJ4Wm92HHF+kACfXoZG E07ZQlgV/QHK3uAjv77xpms= =a01s -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
Hi,
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [04/04/02 23:08:19] wrote:
> In Mutt, quite often I want to send an email to someone, but I want to
> be able to highlight an email from them, and click "Send it to this
> person, but it isn't a reply" - if that makes sense.
I try to repeat what you want to make sure I think the same as you.
So you want send a mail to someone. You have no alias for her/his
address and just go to another mail of that person to find out the
address. Right?
If so, I recommend using lbdb ('little brother database') which is abled
to create an alias from every incomming mail (requires procmail). You
may use mutt's external query feature to find out the address.
Maybe you also wish to write a short display_filter which automatically
creates an alias when viewing any mail.
I'm sure there're other solutions as well.
HTH,
Cheers, Rocco.
msg26701/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: PGP Signing and Password (not at all "send-hook and setting To: header")
Dean -- First, I must note that you shouldn't just reply to any old message and start a new thread. This has nothing to do with hooks or even any prior musings. ...and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] said... % % Hi all Hello! % % I have just got GNUPG working with Mutt, and since I am still new to % Mutt and PGP I am very impressed. Welcome! You have a delightful mountain of learning ahead of you :-) % % However by default (my choice), I now sign all outgoing emails % (including this one I hope), I have increased the timeout threshold of Yep; it was signed. % mutt remembering my secret key password so that it doesn't prompt me for % each email (just every few hours). That makes some sense, as long as you're confident that your terminal and connection are secure. % % But I was wondering how other people do this and sign all outgoinging I do the same thing; I have my $pgp_timeout bumped up and I lock my screen(1) session under PuTTY (at work or sometimes home) or ssh (at home) when I leave it and then my PC at work has the screen saver and lock cranked down to one minute. If I'm not just stepping outside my cube to grab a printout then it'll get closed up pretty quickly. Yes, it's now second nature to keep tapping the shift key if I'm deep in thought about something on the screen :-) % emails. Do you just accept that you need to enter your password every % so often, and "thats life" so to speak? You'll definitely need to enter it every so often; you don't want to store it in a file or in an environment variable or anywhere else insecure. Yeah, someone could probably patch mutt to accept a much longer timeout, but every nine hours or so is a pretty good maximum; once a day as you sit down to work and you're not bothered unless you stay late. % % Thanks for any help offered. HTH & HAND % % - Dean :-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! msg26702/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:50:25PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote: > Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > > > > given the above, i know mutt handles pgp/mime natively and that it can > > do application/pgp with the pgp_create_traditional. my problem is > > that neither of these formats appears to work if the recipient is > > using outlook. btw - the outlook is set up to use the g-data > > gnu-plugin. is there a way to get mutt to use ascii armor and will > > that be viewable by my outlook user? will the ascii armor work for > > encryption as well? > > you want to use pgp_create_traditional, but you want the content type to > be set as ascii text. > > so basically, you would need to run either 1.2.5 or 1.3.x with the > pgp_outlook_compat patch (i think there's a version for 1.2.5, which it > looks like you're running currently), or the cvs version, which (as you > can see) can create a traditional message in a way that will be read by > MUAs other than mutt. excellent, thanks for the help! i'll look around for the patch, mutt.org i'm thinking. if i have an email to which i add an attachement and then choose the encrypt and sign options with pgp_create_traditional, will the attachement be encrypted as well or must i encrypt and sign it by itself? my guess is the latter as that appears to be why people are now moving (flame material, i know) towards the pgp/mime method. -- Peter Abplanalp Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: pgp.mit.edu msg26703/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: PGP Signing and Password
Rocco -- ...and then Rocco Rutte said... % [talking about PGP passwords and such] % % I type it every time because it's a security feature and I try to store % passwords in my mind only. I do not even want to store it somewhere in % memory and/or swap. Good idea on how to store; better safe than sorry is not an unwise maxim. FWIW, if gpg is installed on your machine with the proper root permissions then it can keep the passphrase from being swapped out to disk, which means that you need only distrust root[*] sniffing around in memory and not worry about someone tearing into your box... [*] Which could, admittedly, be the whole world if the rest of your machine is not well configured. % % Typing more often also makes me forget it less often... ;-) Yeah, there is that. I haven't had that problem with a passphrase yet, though, I'm glad to say! % % Cheers, Rocco. 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! msg26704/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
On Thu 04-Apr-2002 at 02:34:50PM -0700, Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > > it is now my understanding that there are 3 ways to sign a message: > pgp/mime, ascii armor, and application/pgp. i'm not certain on the > terminology for the last two or even that there is a difference > between them. might someone enlighten me? Your understanding is pretty much correct, and Will has given you the mutt solution for communicating via ascii-pgp with Outlook (this involves a patch). For sending signed/encrypted messages to Outlook you might want to also look at the alternative s/mime system (also a mutt patch) or you can ascii pgp encrypt/sign the body of your mail in your editor (ie. outside of mutt altogether). -- Bruno
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
Where can I get that pgp_outlook_compat patch? mutt.org has a link to ftp.cm.nu, but I can't access it. Is there somewhere else I can get it? -R On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:50:25PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote: > Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > > > > given the above, i know mutt handles pgp/mime natively and that it can > > do application/pgp with the pgp_create_traditional. my problem is > > that neither of these formats appears to work if the recipient is > > using outlook. btw - the outlook is set up to use the g-data > > gnu-plugin. is there a way to get mutt to use ascii armor and will > > that be viewable by my outlook user? will the ascii armor work for > > encryption as well? > > you want to use pgp_create_traditional, but you want the content type to > be set as ascii text. > > so basically, you would need to run either 1.2.5 or 1.3.x with the > pgp_outlook_compat patch (i think there's a version for 1.2.5, which it > looks like you're running currently), or the cvs version, which (as you > can see) can create a traditional message in a way that will be read by > MUAs other than mutt. > > -- > Will Yardley > input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . > -- Robert S Conde PGP Key: 0xE94C96E3 msg26706/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
Dean -- ...and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] said... % % Me again! :) Welcome back! Returning to the trough? :-) % % Sorry if my previous email appeared as a thread to another message, % there is a reason though, which is why I have this question. Funny you should mention that... % % In Mutt, quite often I want to send an email to someone, but I want to % be able to highlight an email from them, and click "Send it to this % person, but it isn't a reply" - if that makes sense. It does, but it's not good behavior with a thread-aware MUA. % % I am just lazy for not wanting to have to alias everyone that I am Yes, you are :-) % writing to, but my emails usually start by going into the folder for the % person that I am writing to and clicking an old email from them, then % pressing "r" which adds in the in-reply-to line in the header. I then % manually "E"dit the email headers and remove the reference to the reply. If you can get rid of the References: and In-Reply-To: headers, then you're on your way, but if you leave either then mutt will very cleverly ferret out where the message belongs -- even if it no longer belongs there -- and place it for the reader. % % There must be an easier way - anyone? :) Yes, there is; use your aliases file or an external query to something like lbdb or abook or ... % % Thanks again HTH & HAND % % Dean :-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! msg26707/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: send-hook and setting To: header
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:00:40PM -0800, Michael Elkins wrote: : : Eugene Lee wrote: : > : > I'd like to change this slightly. On messages sent to the mailing list : > via the alternate address B, I want 'L' to generate the headers using : > the main address A, i.e. "To: ". Messages sent to the main address A : > are fine and can be left alone. I'm guessing a send-hook will work, but : > I haven't been able to divinate the right combination. : : You can't do this in Mutt. If you really want to munge the headers, : your best bet is to do it with procmail before the mail gets delivered. : send-hook only allows you to change settings, not edit the recipient : list. Ahhh. I was afraid of this. But thanks for the confirmation. Do you or anyone else know if this can be done in version 1.3.28? -- Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
Peter -- ...and then Peter T. Abplanalp said... % % On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:50:25PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote: % > Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: ... % > > that neither of these formats appears to work if the recipient is % > > using outlook. btw - the outlook is set up to use the g-data ... % > % > so basically, you would need to run either 1.2.5 or 1.3.x with the Either Shane Wegener's $p_o_c patch or Dale Wooledge's pgp-traditional patch, as I understand it, though I have not yet run the full gamut of tests under 1.3.28 to know for sure. I'm almost certain that Dale's patch let's you just set $pgp_create_traditional and not have to worry about $p_o_c and yet still talk with LookOut! successfully. % > pgp_outlook_compat patch (i think there's a version for 1.2.5, which it BTW, since you are running 1.2.5 you ought to upgrade to 1.2.5.1, sans security hole, and so you might as well go to 1.3.28 anyway. % > looks like you're running currently), or the cvs version, which (as you % > can see) can create a traditional message in a way that will be read by % > MUAs other than mutt. % % excellent, thanks for the help! i'll look around for the patch, % mutt.org i'm thinking. Actually, probably not; I haven't looked there recently to see what patch contributors are listed, but Shane's and Dale's patches are pure feature and aren't part of the official mutt package. You can search through the archives for sw.pgp_outlook_compat and/or dw.pgp-traditional, since they were both posted to mutt-users, or you can surf over to http://mutt.justpickone.org/ and look in the cocktail directory for Dale's and further under the Old directory for Shane's. While you're there, you can check my 00-Sources file and probably find each of their URLs. % % if i have an email to which i add an attachement and then choose the % encrypt and sign options with pgp_create_traditional, will the A final possibility is a macro in the compose menu to manually sign and/or encrypt the message before you send it. You can find some discussion on the subject with serach terms like "pgp + macro + davidtg" because I remember taking part in a few of them. The idea lives on as the only alternative for some because ... % attachement be encrypted as well or must i encrypt and sign it by % itself? my guess is the latter as that appears to be why people are % now moving (flame material, i know) towards the pgp/mime method. ... that's my understanding as well. $p_c_t will only work if you have no attachments and use us-ascii characters, or at least that's the way it's been through 1.3.x so far. % % -- % Peter Abplanalp % % Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] % PGP: pgp.mit.edu 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! msg26709/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
Robert -- ...and then Robert Conde said... % % Where can I get that pgp_outlook_compat patch? mutt.org has a link to % ftp.cm.nu, but I can't access it. Is there somewhere else I can get it? See my reply, in this thread, to Peter and then surf over to http://mutt.justpickone.org/ and dig in. % % -R 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! msg26710/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: send-hook and setting To: header
Eugene -- ...and then Eugene Lee said... % % On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:00:40PM -0800, Michael Elkins wrote: % : % : Eugene Lee wrote: % : > ... % : > are fine and can be left alone. I'm guessing a send-hook will work, but % : > I haven't been able to divinate the right combination. % : % : You can't do this in Mutt. If you really want to munge the headers, ... % % Ahhh. I was afraid of this. But thanks for the confirmation. Do you % or anyone else know if this can be done in version 1.3.28? Nope. Not in mutt -- at all. Were I you I'd have procmail recognize messages to/from B and rewrite it as to/from A so that mutt just knows about A. % % -- % Eugene Lee % [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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! msg26711/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
David T-G wrote: > > ... that's my understanding as well. $p_c_t will only work if you have > no attachments and use us-ascii characters, or at least that's the way > it's been through 1.3.x so far. yup - for attachments you'd need to use s/mime or PGP/MIME. traditionally signed messages are useful in their own ways though - they're neater in mailing list archives, can be checked later more easily (since you can just copy the text into a text file and verify it), and are more widely readable. personally, i like having the option to do both. mutt 1.5.0 (cvs version) does attempt to allow use of non us-ascii characters (using utf encoding as i understand it), but i've had inconsistent results so far. the cvs version also adds an 'x-mutt-action' or something of the sort to the content type, so that other people using mutt (well people using a version of mutt that supports this, at least) won't have to do anything special to verify the message. -- Will Yardley input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . >
Re: PGP Signing and Password
Hi, * David T-G [04/05/02 00:06:31] wrote: > ...and then Rocco Rutte said... > % > [talking about PGP passwords and such] > FWIW, if gpg is installed on your machine with the proper root permissions > then it can keep the passphrase from being swapped out to disk, which > means that you need only distrust root[*] sniffing around in memory and > not worry about someone tearing into your box... I know. But I do not everywhere have any influence on wether gpg should be installed setuid(root) or not. Cheers, Rocco. msg26713/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
I know most of these things were already said, but some of it's speculation
and the complete answers may not be clear, so a bit of clarification:
On Apr 04, Bruno Postle [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Thu 04-Apr-2002 at 02:34:50PM -0700, Peter T. Abplanalp wrote:
> > it is now my understanding that there are 3 ways to sign a message:
> > pgp/mime, ascii armor, and application/pgp. i'm not certain on the
> > terminology for the last two or even that there is a difference
> > between them. might someone enlighten me?
>
> Your understanding is pretty much correct, and Will has given you the
> mutt solution for communicating via ascii-pgp with Outlook (this
> involves a patch).
>
> For sending signed/encrypted messages to Outlook you might want to also
> look at the alternative s/mime system (also a mutt patch) or you can
> ascii pgp encrypt/sign the body of your mail in your editor (ie. outside
> of mutt altogether).
Both of these ("ascii-pgp" and S/MIME) are present in the CVS head
development branch without any special patches. That branch is very much
in the early stages of development, though, so a lot of things still need
working out, shaking down, and fixing. If you have a lot of interest in
this stuff head on over to mutt-dev and grab a CVS copy and help out with
it. It might make sense for someone to backport the CVS "ascii-pgp" stuff
as a new version of that patch for 1.2/1.3/1.4 as well, since it's solved
differently there then in the other available patches.
On Apr 04, David T-G [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> ...and then Peter T. Abplanalp said...
> % excellent, thanks for the help! i'll look around for the patch,
> % mutt.org i'm thinking.
>
> Actually, probably not; I haven't looked there recently to see what patch
> contributors are listed, but Shane's and Dale's patches are pure feature
> and aren't part of the official mutt package.
No, they're both linked from the patches section on www.mutt.org.
Everything in that section is stuff that isn't part of the official mutt
package so I'm not sure what kind of distinction you were trying to make.
Someone mentioned Shane's link there wasn't working; it works for me but it
takes a good while. He hasn't provided me with any updated link that I
see... anyway my understanding is that Dale's patch superseeded Shane's for
most people.
On Apr 04, Will Yardley [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> David T-G wrote:
> > ... that's my understanding as well. $p_c_t will only work if you have
> > no attachments and use us-ascii characters, or at least that's the way
> > it's been through 1.3.x so far.
...
> mutt 1.5.0 (cvs version) does attempt to allow use of non us-ascii
> characters (using utf encoding as i understand it), but i've had
> inconsistent results so far.
Correct. TLR is trying to get that working but it's rather uncharted
territory so it's definitely a work in progress.
> the cvs version also adds an 'x-mutt-action' or something of the sort to
> the content type, so that other people using mutt (well people using a
> version of mutt that supports this, at least) won't have to do anything
> special to verify the message.
Yeah... I think he broke this back down to be 'x-pgp-action' so it's more
generic.
msg26714/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
Hi Dean, > [...] then > pressing "r" which adds in the in-reply-to line in the header. I then > manually "E"dit the email headers and remove the reference to the reply. > There must be an easier way - anyone? :) If $edit_headers is set, you just have to remove the In-Reply-To line when editing your mail. (and of course change the subject) -- Cedric
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
> % Me again! :) > Welcome back! Returning to the trough? :-) Heh - I must be mad huh! ;) > Yes, there is; use your aliases file or an external query to something > like lbdb or abook or ... Yep, I have just looked into and sucessfully installed lbdb, it was just what I was looking for. However I have to pass a query string to lbdb, so I am just working out how to display all entries in the system. > HTH & HAND Ok, HTH==hope this helps, but HAND? :) Dean msg26716/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
On Apr 04, David T-G [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > ...and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] said... > % writing to, but my emails usually start by going into the folder for the > % person that I am writing to and clicking an old email from them, then > % pressing "r" which adds in the in-reply-to line in the header. I then > % manually "E"dit the email headers and remove the reference to the reply. > > If you can get rid of the References: and In-Reply-To: headers, then > you're on your way, but if you leave either then mutt will very cleverly > ferret out where the message belongs -- even if it no longer belongs > there -- and place it for the reader. Not quite; as Cedric noted, you can just remove the IRT header with $edit_headers set and Mutt will Know What You Meant. > % There must be an easier way - anyone? :) > > Yes, there is; use your aliases file or an external query to something > like lbdb or abook or ... This is what he did, but a 3rd option is to use 'show-address' (bound to @) for a quick cut-and-paste. msg26717/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mac Outlook Exchange client problem
On 04/04/02, Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > first thought: why does anyone send problems with Outlook to this > list? Well I've never had a bounce like this before. But I suppose it is really a plea for enlightenment about character sets and encodings. > > * Rory Campbell-Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 09:09]: > > I'm getting a bounce from a client who is using mac > > outlook exchange. My mail is not showing up properly. > > > This message uses a character set that is > > > not supported by the Internet Service. > > Any ideas on how to avoid this problem? > which kind of character set did you send then? I believe I am using the standard US IS0-8859 char set. How do I get to manipulate charsets, or learn more about them (if this is the problem)? I'm using Debian woody. Thanks Rory -- Rory Campbell-Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Mac Outlook Exchange client problem
On 04/04/02, David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > % > This message uses a character set that is not supported by the > % > Internet Service. To view the original message content, open the > % > attached message. If the text doesn't display correctly, save the > % > attachment to disk, and then open it using a viewer that can display > % > the original character set. > % > <> > > So it sounds like you have a MIME attachment that the Mac client can't > read. What is the format of your mail messages? I don't know enough about using charsets or encodings to answer this sensibly. I believe I'm using the standard u.s. ISO-8859 charset. The message was written in vim in the usual way and then I attached 3 pdfs. The pdfs were created on a mac. The view of the parts of the message looks like this: I 1[text/plain, 8bit, unknown-8bit, 1.0K] A 2 invoice february 2002.doc.pdf [applica/pdf, base64, 46K] A 3 invoice march 2002.doc.pdf [applica/pdf, base64, 45K] A 4 invoice january 2002.doc.pdf [applica/pdf, base64, 45K] > % Any ideas on how to avoid this problem? > > Well, you could always quit corresponding with that client ;-) A bit tricky to do that - I run an IT department with needy users all mailing through MacOE! Thanks for any help Rory -- Rory Campbell-Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-04 21:08]: > In Mutt, quite often I want to send an email to someone, but I want > to be able to highlight an email from them, and click "Send it > to this person, but it isn't a reply" - if that makes sense. > > I am just lazy for not wanting to have to alias everyone that I am > writing to, but my emails usually start by going into the folder for the > person that I am writing to and clicking an old email from them, then > pressing "r" which adds in the in-reply-to line in the header. I then > manually "E"dit the email headers and remove the reference to the reply. > > There must be an easier way - anyone? :) i once suggested a command which does just that - send a new mail to the sender of the current mail. but it was turned down. (noone needs this etc). so I often use "resend-message" on some message to initiate a new mail (and "set edit_hdrs", of course). not much difference from your "reply" method, though. or use "display-address" and copy the address from there. (easy with mutt inside "screen"..) then just send a new mail. Sven
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
> i once suggested a command which does just that - > send a new mail to the sender of the current mail. > but it was turned down. (noone needs this etc). Damn, this seems like just the option I was wanting really. Its a shame that it doesn't exist. A sort of "send new mail to recipient" feature. Doesn't anyone else thing that would be a very nice solution? I know I can edit the headers, cut/paste (eurgh, the mouse), if I type it, I _might_ get it wrong, lbdb seems like overkill and I still have to find the user ;) > so I often use "resend-message" on some message > to initiate a new mail (and "set edit_hdrs", of course). > not much difference from your "reply" method, though. Yep, and if you do what I did earlier (forget to nuke the header line) then its no good cus you end up looking like a lemon (so to speak). > or use "display-address" and copy the address from there. > (easy with mutt inside "screen"..) then just send a new mail. Eurgh, mouse. - Dean msg26721/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
Hi, * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [04/05/02 01:50:49] wrote: > Yep, I have just looked into and sucessfully installed lbdb, it was just > what I was looking for. However I have to pass a query string to lbdb, > so I am just working out how to display all entries in the system. Maybe via "display_filter" or Procmail? > > HTH & HAND > Ok, HTH==hope this helps, but HAND? Have A Nice Day. Is your jargon file broken? Cheers, Rocco. msg26722/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sending mail to a recipient
* On 2002.04.04, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
* "Sven Guckes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In Mutt, quite often I want to send an email to someone, but I want
> > to be able to highlight an email from them, and click "Send it
> > to this person, but it isn't a reply" - if that makes sense.
>
> i once suggested a command which does just that -
> send a new mail to the sender of the current mail.
> but it was turned down. (noone needs this etc).
macro index M "set editor=\"sed -e '/^In-Reply-To:/d' -e '/^$/{' -e p
-e q -e '}' %s >%s.tmp && mv -f %s.tmp %s; vi %s\"set
editor='vi %s'" "Send new message to sender"
Or use or , as you prefer.
--
-D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Re: M$ Outhouse E. for UNIX
* On 2002.03.27, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, * "Rocco Rutte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > something like 'hostname | cut ...' to get the short name. If I - on > Solaris - run 'hostname -s' it tells me: 'uname: not super user'. So I > use a switch in my .profile to find wether this is Solaris or not. It says "uname: not super user" because uname(2) is the syscall that sets the hostname. Just use uname -n on all operating systems, and don't trouble yourself with the switch. "uname -n" returns the nodename. The nodename is the "real" hostname, and has nothing to do with the DNS or /etc/hosts name that your IP address resolves to, and should not contain any dots. (If it does, your system setup needs adjustment.) -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Re: PGP Signing and Password
begin quoting what [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 10:04:41PM +0100: > > But I was wondering how other people do this and sign all outgoinging > emails. Do you just accept that you need to enter your password every > so often, and "thats life" so to speak? Yes. If it bothers you, there are 86400 seconds in a day. msg26725/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
...David T-G made some exceleent suggestions... ok, i got mutt 1.3.28, put dale's patch over it, compiled and installed it. now my outlook can read the stuff. thanks! however, if i am working without any attachments everything works fine but as soon as i add an attachemnt, i no longer get the send application/pgp ([n]/y): prompt and mutt sends the message without asking me. is this because mutt figures if i have an attachmenti'm going to send a mime anyway so why not just add a pgp/mime part? is it even possible to send an application/pgp message with an attachment? -- Peter Abplanalp Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: pgp.mit.edu msg26726/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Is there anything wrong with hitting F in the compose menu and filtering the message through the "gpg --clearsign" command? - -R On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:50:25PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > > > > given the above, i know mutt handles pgp/mime natively and that it can > > do application/pgp with the pgp_create_traditional. my problem is > > that neither of these formats appears to work if the recipient is > > using outlook. btw - the outlook is set up to use the g-data > > gnu-plugin. is there a way to get mutt to use ascii armor and will > > that be viewable by my outlook user? will the ascii armor work for > > encryption as well? > > you want to use pgp_create_traditional, but you want the content type to > be set as ascii text. > > so basically, you would need to run either 1.2.5 or 1.3.x with the > pgp_outlook_compat patch (i think there's a version for 1.2.5, which it > looks like you're running currently), or the cvs version, which (as you > can see) can create a traditional message in a way that will be read by > MUAs other than mutt. > > - -- > Will Yardley > input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: public key: http://infinitejazz.net/will/pgp/gpg.asc > > iD8DBQE8rMqhswHW5vg5XAIRAi87AJ0TfPST/Tb/iXZEpBJ4Wm92HHF+kACfXoZG > E07ZQlgV/QHK3uAjv77xpms= > =a01s > -END PGP SIGNATURE- - -- Robert S Conde PGP Key: 0xE94C96E3 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8rPilRDpbEulMluMRAp1NAJ4naWeX6TL3N1I6vxKb20YlACGe5wCeJEjT T3hU6C3hTefMrffq2xjhQpE= =NeCV -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: iconv vs libiconv
* On 2002.04.03, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, * "Sven Guckes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > let's see what the configure script says: > > guckes@ritz:~/install/mutt-1.3.28> ./configure --help|grep icon > --with-libiconv-prefix=DIR search for libiconv in DIR/include and DIR/lib > > so there is something you *can* set. but - > what is the default for this DIR on Solaris? Configure found iconv automatically on my Solaris 8 system. I never had to specify a --with-libiconv-prefix at all. The iconv routines are in libc, so there's no special path anyway. -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
begin quoting what Peter T. Abplanalp said on Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 06:06:14PM -0700: > > a mime anyway so why not just add a pgp/mime part? is it even > possible to send an application/pgp message with an attachment? No. That's one reason inline signatures are evil. msg26729/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: send-hook and setting To: header
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 05:22:51PM -0500, David T-G wrote: : : Were I you I'd have procmail recognize messages to/from B and rewrite it : as to/from A so that mutt just knows about A. Yup, that's easy enough for a single email address. But I've not figured out how to do so while preserving multiple recipients. The ideal recipe would tranform these headerfields: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], B, [EMAIL PROTECTED] into these: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], A, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Old-Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], B, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (and similarly if the address appeared in the "To:" header) -- Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 08:26:49PM -0500, Shawn McMahon wrote: > > No. That's one reason inline signatures are evil. > i kind of figured; however, the gnupg plugin for outlook from g-data handles it by inline signing the message and then signing the attachment separately. it handles encryption the same way. i guess that this would be considered "broken" by today's "standards." i guess if i want mutt to handle things the same way for those of my recipients who have to use outlook, i'm going to have to "fix" mutt or has anyone already done this? -- Peter Abplanalp Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: pgp.mit.edu msg26731/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
begin quoting what Peter T. Abplanalp said on Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 06:49:15PM -0700: > that this would be considered "broken" by today's "standards." i > guess if i want mutt to handle things the same way for those of my > recipients who have to use outlook, i'm going to have to "fix" mutt or > has anyone already done this? Yes. There's a patch, and it's already in the latest CVS versions. See the archives; it's been discussed several times in the last week, and at least once today. msg26732/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
[OT] hostnames (was Re: M$ Outhouse E. for UNIX)
David Champion wrote: > > It says "uname: not super user" because uname(2) is the syscall that > sets the hostname. > > Just use uname -n on all operating systems, and don't trouble yourself > with the switch. "uname -n" returns the nodename. The nodename is the > "real" hostname, and has nothing to do with the DNS or /etc/hosts name > that your IP address resolves to, and should not contain any dots. (If > it does, your system setup needs adjustment.) are you sure this is true for FreeBSD? i find that various things complain if i don't have "hostname" set to the fqdn (and yes, my IP and hostname, as well as the loopback interface are in /etc/hosts). also, the fact that the 'hostname' command in FreeBSD has a '-s' switch (which trims off any domain information) seems to indicate that at least some people set it this way; uname -n seems to report the same thing as hostname: jazz% uname -n jazz.hq.newdream.net i'm sure there may be a more elegant way to do this, but i trim it down with something like like this; seems to work on most operating systems i've tried it on (with various versions of sed) - i suppose it wouldn't work if there were numbers in the hostname, so probably using s/\..*//g might be better. S_HOSTNAME=$(hostname | sed "s/\.[A-Za-z]*//g") -- Will Yardley input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . >
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > i kind of figured; however, the gnupg plugin for outlook from g-data > handles it by inline signing the message and then signing the > attachment separately. it handles encryption the same way. i guess > that this would be considered "broken" by today's "standards." i > guess if i want mutt to handle things the same way for those of my > recipients who have to use outlook, i'm going to have to "fix" mutt or > has anyone already done this? whatever anyone tells you here, most people who don't use mutt or evolution (ie a large percentage of people who use PGP) don't use PGP/MIME. PGP/MIME is a "standard", but it's not "standard", if that makes sense. there are constant debates on this, so i'm going to shut my mouth right now. personally, the only time i use PGP/MIME is if i know that someone is able to deal with it or prefers that style. taking the attitude of "i'm right and the rest of the world is wrong" only gets you so far... at least when you're already way outnumbered. i've said it before, and i'll say it again... the purpose of email (as far as i'm concerned) is first and foremost to *communicate* with other people. very few people that i'm interested in communicating with use mutt (no offense intended to anyone here). -- Will Yardley input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . >
Re: [OT] hostnames (was Re: M$ Outhouse E. for UNIX)
* On 2002.04.04, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, * "Will Yardley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > also, the fact that the 'hostname' command in FreeBSD has a '-s' switch > (which trims off any domain information) seems to indicate that at least > some people set it this way; uname -n seems to report the same thing as > hostname: I know that some systems' default installers do this in these latter days, but I've never seen a reason for it, and I always undo it after installation with no ill effects. My computer's name (nodename) has nothing to do with the IP interfaces it supports. I've had systems with many IP addresses, but none of them tell me the identity of the machine -- just what services it should be expected to offer. -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
[OT] Re: echo $EUID
* On 2002.04.02, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, * "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 11:27:31PM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote: > > /usr/xpg4/bin/id -u > To expand upon this: > > When SunOS becamse Solaris, its base moved from BSD (Berkeley's > UNIX-based OS) to System V (official UNIX from AT&T). > For compatibility with System V applications (and with the POSIX standard), > they had to give all of the standard commands in /bin (or /usr/bin) > the System V semantics. > > However, the older behavior was in many cases superior, and those commands > have been retained in /usr/xpg4. I tend to prefer the XPG version of > most commands, so I have /usr/xpg4 before /usr/bin in my PATH. Close -- the BSD commands were retained[1] in /usr/ucb. /usr/xpg4 contains editions which are compliant with the X/Open Portability Guide, version 4. In general, I find that where XPG4 favors one predecessor over the other, it's SVR4. XPG4 was created by X/Open[2] as a multi-vendor effort to standardize various implementations of UNIX, both SVR4- and BSD-based. But as all the major commercial participants at the time were already focused on or were shifting toward SVR3 or SVR4, that's where the focus of XPG lay, too. Sun was actually central to all this: it was their collaboration with UNIX System Laboratories that created SVR4.0, and their technical and business interest in their BSD roots that assured the integration of BSD components into System V. I believe that Sun is the only vendor with full source-code rights to SVR4 besides SCO, who still owned UNIX last time I checked. There are other licensees, but Sun has a lifetime membership, so to speak, and can legally redistribute SVR4.0 source code. All IIRC, of course. I try to follow the sordid history, but I'm not sure that I really rate even as high as amateur. Sven, I deleted your Cc: for you. -- [1] for compatibility purposes, though, not because of some perceived superiority. Solaris has tried to provide run-time and compile-time compatibility to SunOS 4.1[.4], and providing a /usr/ucb version of common shell tools is integral to that effort. [2] now The Open Group, who owned UNIX(tm) for a while. -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Re: send-hook and setting To: header
Eugene -- ...and then Eugene Lee said... % % On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 05:22:51PM -0500, David T-G wrote: % : % : Were I you I'd have procmail recognize messages to/from B and rewrite it % : as to/from A so that mutt just knows about A. % % Yup, that's easy enough for a single email address. But I've not Right. % figured out how to do so while preserving multiple recipients. The Ahhh... % ideal recipe would tranform these headerfields: ... % into these: % % To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] % Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], A, [EMAIL PROTECTED] % Old-Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], B, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hmmm... Sounds like it might be more a job for sed than for formail, actually. % % (and similarly if the address appeared in the "To:" header) Right. That's the same simple case, though. % % % -- % Eugene Lee % [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good 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! msg26737/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
Jeremy, et al --
...and then Jeremy Blosser said...
%
% I know most of these things were already said, but some of it's speculation
% and the complete answers may not be clear, so a bit of clarification:
Thanks; that's always helpful!
%
...
%
% Both of these ("ascii-pgp" and S/MIME) are present in the CVS head
...
% it. It might make sense for someone to backport the CVS "ascii-pgp" stuff
% as a new version of that patch for 1.2/1.3/1.4 as well, since it's solved
% differently there then in the other available patches.
I'd love to see that.
%
% On Apr 04, David T-G [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
% > ...and then Peter T. Abplanalp said...
% > % excellent, thanks for the help! i'll look around for the patch,
% > % mutt.org i'm thinking.
% >
% > Actually, probably not; I haven't looked there recently to see what patch
% > contributors are listed, but Shane's and Dale's patches are pure feature
% > and aren't part of the official mutt package.
%
% No, they're both linked from the patches section on www.mutt.org.
Oh, great.
% Everything in that section is stuff that isn't part of the official mutt
% package so I'm not sure what kind of distinction you were trying to make.
I knew that many sample config sites and a couple of patch sites were
available from the mutt page, but actually didn't realize that so much
contributed stuff was available. Since these feature patches aren't
fixes to be rolled in but are separate, I didn't realize they'd be linked
from the main site.
%
% Someone mentioned Shane's link there wasn't working; it works for me but it
% takes a good while. He hasn't provided me with any updated link that I
% see... anyway my understanding is that Dale's patch superseeded Shane's for
% most people.
Correct.
Thanks again!
:-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!
msg26738/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Mac Outlook Exchange client problem
Rory, et al -- ...and then Rory Campbell-Lange said... % % On 04/04/02, David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: % > % > This message uses a character set that is not supported by the ... % > So it sounds like you have a MIME attachment that the Mac client can't % > read. What is the format of your mail messages? % % I don't know enough about using charsets or encodings to answer this % sensibly. I believe I'm using the standard u.s. ISO-8859 charset. The Hmmm... % message was written in vim in the usual way and then I attached 3 pdfs. % The pdfs were created on a mac. That shouldn't be a problem; they're pretty clearly identified... % % The view of the parts of the message looks like this: % % I 1[text/plain, 8bit, unknown-8bit, 1.0K] % A 2 invoice february 2002.doc.pdf [applica/pdf, base64, 46K] % A 3 invoice march 2002.doc.pdf [applica/pdf, base64, 45K] % A 4 invoice january 2002.doc.pdf [applica/pdf, base64, 45K] I wonder about the unknown-8bit part there. I don't see why a Mac would know how to handle it, either. What if you and then and change it to iso-8859 or perhaps something else recognizable (I don't know what the choices are; try it and see if you get a pick list)? % % > % Any ideas on how to avoid this problem? % > % > Well, you could always quit corresponding with that client ;-) % % A bit tricky to do that - I run an IT department with needy users all % mailing through MacOE! Fah, they're just users. Pawn communications off on an underling and get back to nethack :-) % % Thanks for any help HTH & HAND % Rory % % -- % Rory Campbell-Lange % <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> % :-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! msg26739/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: gnupg signing w/ mutt
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 08:54:26PM -0500, Shawn McMahon wrote: > begin quoting what Peter T. Abplanalp said on Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 06:49:15PM -0700: > > that this would be considered "broken" by today's "standards." i > > guess if i want mutt to handle things the same way for those of my > > recipients who have to use outlook, i'm going to have to "fix" mutt or > > has anyone already done this? > > Yes. There's a patch, and it's already in the latest CVS versions. > > See the archives; it's been discussed several times in the last week, > and at least once today. ok, i checked the archives and what i found was that people were talking about dale's p_c_t patch. that does not do what outlook is expecting w.r.t. attachments. i also got the cvs version and built that. it behaves like 1.3.28 with dale's patch out-of-the-box; however, that is not doing what outlook expects w.r.t. attachments either. am i missing something? when i send stuff from outlook, i think it first clearsigns the email message and then clearsigns the attachment and then creates a mime message. when my mutt gets a hold of it, it checks the inline sig and then i have to save off the attachment which i can then gpg --verify from the command line. when i send it from my mutt, if there is an attachment, i no longer get the send inline sig prompt (which i get on non-attachment emails because i have p_c_t set to ask-no) and mutt sends the message of as pgp/mime, i'm guessing. speaking of which, how can i check this w/ outlook? so i can see how the pgp/mime stuff is easier but i still need to communicate with quite a few outlook people so i'd like for my mutt to give me that option. -- Peter Abplanalp Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: pgp.mit.edu msg26740/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Return-Path: header
Hi, I've been using mutt for some time (I'm no expert, though) and I love it. However, I've run into a recent problem which I need a solution for. I often compose mail when I'm away from home via an ssh session into my home LAN which has a dummy domain name for internal DHCP purposes. The problem is that when I use mutt, the Return-Path header is sent with my dummy domain name, which causes certain (not all) SMTP servers to not deliver my message since the domain is unresolvable. When I use other mail clients (Pine, Eudora, Mail in MacOSX), the header is sent with the same address as in the From: field and delivers fine. The mail is being sent via a Linux router running Postfix. I have used Pine on this system as well, so I don't think Postfix is the issue. Any way I can get Mutt to send the desired "Return-Path" header? Thanks! --ec __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: symlinks in ~/Mail
> > As to my experience (with procmail filtering), it is unreliable to > > expect that the send-msg-to-list address appears in To: or Cc:. > > so this list distributes messages when the list is in the BCC header? > well, blame the list admin then! Yes, and I won't waste time on politics, which is what complainig to list owners boils down to. Besides, I actually find bcc: mailinglist useful, to avoid private addresses in to: appearing on the list. Extremely useful actually. > depending on your MDA you can still filter on the Delivered-To line. > but that's a local problem which you can probably solve yourself. Yes, procmail handles all that easily. The trickier bit is finding out which headers are indeed forcefully inserted by the list handler, and which are simply commonly used I (besides keeping up-to-date with it). But that's not to do with mutt. > and i almost never see the "clutter" as my shell's globbing > allows to leave them out in a very simple way: > > ls *(^@) Too much typing. > PS: Volker - you do not seem to attribute quoted text. > that is bad. especially on mailing lists. Personal opinion. I find it a waste of bandwidth. We're dealing with issues, not individuals. The real sender can easily be found a few msgs back. At least people trim their replies on this list... Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann, list0570 at paradise dot net dot nz http://volker.orcon.net.nz/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
Re: Return-Path: header
EC wrote: > The problem is that when I use mutt, the Return-Path header is sent with my > dummy domain name, which causes certain (not all) SMTP servers to not deliver > my message since the domain is unresolvable. When I use other mail clients > (Pine, Eudora, Mail in MacOSX), the header is sent with the same address as in > the From: field and delivers fine. [...] > Any way I can get Mutt to send the desired "Return-Path" header? | 6.3.43. envelope_from | | Type: boolean | Default: no so "set envelop_from=yes" should do that, IIRC. Alex -- Alexander Wasmuth http://alexander.wasmuth.org/
Re: Return-Path: header
--- Alexander Wasmuth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Any way I can get Mutt to send the desired "Return-Path" header? > > | 6.3.43. envelope_from > | > | Type: boolean > | Default: no > > so "set envelop_from=yes" should do that, IIRC. That did it! Thanks! :) --ec __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/
