Re: ';' tag-prefix function dead in pager mode
Michael Tatge wrote: > Patrick ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered: >> I am unable while in pager mode to use the tag-prefix (;) operator to >> perform operations on tag-selected e-mails. Requires changing to the >> 'index' menu for use. > Yeah, so what? Comeon is that such a hard thing to do? Perhaps not, but it is annoying -- since a lot of people use 'pager_index_lines', it does seem like it would be nice if mutt would at least allow you to bind certain functions (limit / tag-prefix, etc) in the pager, even if they're not bound by default. -- Will Yardley input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . >
Re: Emulating (gaaack) Outlook attribution
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Sven Guckes wrote: > set attibution="begin 666 quoted text of %boss" begin followed by two blanks anywhere in the mail body would do, until termininated by an end But what's the point? Bosses define what constitutes brokenness. If he can't read your email, it's your fault, not his client's.
Flea not working?
Hey together, I filed a bug, but I never saw it on the lists, nor in the bugs.guug.de bugtracking system. Is flea not working? The bug is a little nasty, since Mutt is deleting files where it should not: Create an attachment Toggle-unlink Detach-file Now the file in the attachment is deleted (unlinked) on disk. -- Mads Martin Jørgensen, http://mmj.dk "Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic and totally illogic, with just a little bit more effort?" -- A. P. J.
Re: Outlook and "inline attachments"
* Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 09:56]: > On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Sven Guckes wrote: > > > set attibution="begin 666 quoted text of %boss" > > begin followed by two blanks anywhere in the mail body would do, until > termininated by an > end two blanks? really? > But what's the point? Bosses define what constitutes brokenness. > If he can't read your email, it's your fault, not his client's. so if the boss sends himself such an email using his own client and finds the same kind of effect - will he still believe that the problem is with *other* clients? if yes - change job. Sven
Re: Flea not working?
* Mads Martin Joergensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 10:15]: > I filed a bug, but I never saw it on the lists, nor in > the bugs.guug.de bugtracking system. Is flea not working? > The bug is a little nasty, since Mutt > is deleting files where it should not: > > Create an attachment > Toggle-unlink > Detach-file > > Now the file in the attachment is deleted (unlinked) on disk. i remember such a bug - but it's been a while. can you please add the version number for this? http://bugs.guug.de/ i quickly searched for your name in the archives but could not find it. you are not using an old version of flea, are you? Sven
Re: Flea not working?
* Sven Guckes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Aug 30. 2002 12:39]: > > I filed a bug, but I never saw it on the lists, nor in > > the bugs.guug.de bugtracking system. Is flea not working? > > The bug is a little nasty, since Mutt > > is deleting files where it should not: > > > > Create an attachment > > Toggle-unlink > > Detach-file > > > > Now the file in the attachment is deleted (unlinked) on disk. > > i remember such a bug - but it's been a while. > can you please add the version number for this? 1.3.27 and 1.4 is the ones I've confirmed it with. And it's pretty nasty BTW to be able to loose files. > http://bugs.guug.de/ > i quickly searched for your name in > the archives but could not find it. > you are not using an old > version of flea, are you? I'm using the one from Mutt 1.4. -- Mads Martin Jørgensen, http://mmj.dk "Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic and totally illogic, with just a little bit more effort?" -- A. P. J.
Re: "it seems"
* Will Yardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 07:25]: > Michael Tatge wrote: > > Patrick ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered: > > >> I am unable while in pager mode to use the tag-prefix (;) operator to > >> perform operations on tag-selected e-mails. Requires changing to the > >> 'index' menu for use. > > > Yeah, so what? Comeon is that such a hard thing to do? > > Perhaps not, but it is annoying -- since a lot of people use > 'pager_index_lines', it does seem like it would be nice if mutt would > at least allow you to bind certain functions (limit / tag-prefix, etc) > in the pager, even if they're not bound by default. "it seems". however, it is not. fvwm95 shows a windows theme. but it is *not* windows. vim shows colored text but it is not a parser. playing lotto is easy but winning is not. so much for "it seems". that's life. rtfm. Sven
Re: Flea not working?
* Mads Martin Joergensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 10:42]: > > > I filed a bug, but I never saw it on the lists, nor in > > > the bugs.guug.de bugtracking system. Is flea not working? > > i remember such a bug - but it's been a while. > > can you please add the version number for this? > 1.3.27 and 1.4 is the ones I've confirmed it with. > And it's pretty nasty BTW to be able to lose files. sure is. but "if you don't succeed at first - try, try again"! alternatively, you could send your report to mutt-dev... Sven
Re: Outlook and "inline attachments"
begin Fri, 30 Aug 2002 Sven Guckes quotation: > two blanks? really? Of course. In fact I later noticed you used the same example in one of your signatures. > > But what's the point? Bosses define what constitutes brokenness. > > If he can't read your email, it's your fault, not his client's. > > so if the boss sends himself such an email using his own client > and finds the same kind of effect - will he still believe that > the problem is with *other* clients? if yes - change job. In coprophagate environments you're just completely locked in the Redmond prison. Changing jobs is a good idea, once the current dry spell on the job market passes.
a change towards freedom (was: Outlook and "inline attachments")
* Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 11:12]: > begin Fri, 30 Aug 2002 Sven Guckes quotation: > > two blanks? really? > Of course. In fact I later noticed you used > the same example in one of your signatures. err... these have only *one* space after the "begin". no, wait, one of them has two. hmm... > > > But what's the point? Bosses define what constitutes brokenness. > > > If he can't read your email, it's your fault, not his client's. > > > > so if the boss sends himself such an email using his own client > > and finds the same kind of effect - will he still believe that > > the problem is with *other* clients? if yes - change job. > > In coprophagate environments you're just completely locked > in the Redmond prison. Changing jobs is a good idea, > once the current dry spell on the job market passes. so everyone is just waiting for the market to change so they can change jobs to a non-windows environment? what would they switch to, i wonder? macintosh? now, if everyone would change to freebsd or linux... eek! meanwhile i am happy to be able to recognize windows people easily. it would be a lot harder if they all used linux and mutt and vim and... naah, not good. "am editor/mailer werdet ihr sie erkennen!" (if anyone wants to cite the biblical reference in English - go ahead!) anyway, what good is it to wait to change jobs? if all changed jobs then they's swap one place with windows with another place using windows. the change must be within the system itself. and i am not only talking about operating systems.. there needs be a change towards freedom of choice. then again, i'm not sure whether giving users a choice will make all of them happy. see my page http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/mutt/forwhom.php3 still - the bottom line is: if your boss is too dense to realize that he is using broken software then he should pay you twice as much to use it, too! Sven [twice as much *at least*]
Re: Emulating (gaaack) Outlook attribution
On Aug 29, Ken Weingold [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > On Thu, Aug 29, 2002, Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: > > you can always try but it has been my experience that these people > > don't want to change to anything other than M$. if your boss is still > > semi technical this might work; however, if he has gone totally over > > to the dark side of management, he is a lost cause. > > Wow, lucky me that my boss uses mailx or Pine (hey, consider the > alternatives) and she was into the idea of us setting up something for > ourselves to use the Unix MUA of our choice for work email, but we > have Notes and it's a lost cause. We can't enable POP or IMAP either. > And you thought Exchange was bad. Is Notes at least able to forward all incoming mail to an address? Our Exchange server doesn't have IMAP enabled either, so I've got some scripts that make it push incoming mail out to a unix box. Exchange can only forward, not redirect/bounce, so the unix box has scripts that strip off the outside fwd container on incoming. So far it works well. msg30550/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Outlook and "inline attachments"
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Sven Guckes wrote: > so if the boss sends himself such an email using his own client and > finds the same kind of effect - will he still believe that the > problem is with *other* clients? if yes - change job. Sven, bad thing to say right now. When most of your friends are out of work with nothing in sight, they will take anything to get off of unemployment. It's ugly. A programmer friend of mine was looking into working at a restaurant just to make some money. So, your boss using Outlook is really a minor thing in the grand scheme of things right now. The fact that you HAVE a boss right now is a godsend. -Ken
Re: Emulating (gaaack) Outlook attribution
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > Is Notes at least able to forward all incoming mail to an address? > > Our Exchange server doesn't have IMAP enabled either, so I've got some > scripts that make it push incoming mail out to a unix box. Exchange can > only forward, not redirect/bounce, so the unix box has scripts that strip > off the outside fwd container on incoming. So far it works well. Hmm, cool. I will talk to her and maybe set up a Linux box for our mail. We have this huge server for Notes, yet all we use from the whole thing is mail. Only other problem I guess is the address book. I wonder if I can export it to something readable by mutt. -Ken
Re: Windows Bosses
* Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 13:15]: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Sven Guckes wrote: > > so if the boss sends himself such an email using his own > > client and finds the same kind of effect - will he still > > believe that the problem is with *other* clients? > > if yes - change job. > > Sven, bad thing to say right now. When most of your friends are > out of work with nothing in sight, they will take anything to get > off of unemployment. It's ugly. A programmer friend of mine was > looking into working at a restaurant just to make some money. i do understand. comiserations! > So, your boss using Outlook is really a minor thing > in the grand scheme of things right now. The fact > that you HAVE a boss right now is a godsend. err... my boss does not use Outlook. No way. Sven
Re: Spam filtering software
* Stef Slamon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-28 08:34:03 -0700]: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 04:05:57AM -0500, John Buttery wrote: > > Anyway, just out of curiosity, how come you guys aren't using TMDA? > > Just haven't found it yet, or...? > > Because I'm using ASK (www.paganini.net/ask), and it works great. Looks neat; this appears to be a subset of TMDA (functionality-wise), but probably has the advantage of being a lot easier to set up. :) -- John Buttery msg30554/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Exchange Exchange!
* Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 13:19]: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > > Is Notes at least able to forward all incoming mail to an address? > > > > Our Exchange server doesn't have IMAP enabled either, so I've got some > > scripts that make it push incoming mail out to a unix box. Exchange can > > only forward, not redirect/bounce, so the unix box has scripts that strip > > off the outside fwd container on incoming. So far it works well. > > Hmm, cool. I will talk to her and maybe set up a Linux box for our > mail. We have this huge server for Notes, yet all we use from the > whole thing is mail. Only other problem I guess is the address book. > I wonder if I can export it to something readable by mutt. LDAP and the query_command spring to mind... but this ain't the "workarounds for exchange servers" list, is it? ;-) but if someone wants to write up a webpage about his transition from exchange to a LDAP server running on linux... hint hint Sven
Re: Emulating (gaaack) Outlook attribution
On Aug 30, Ken Weingold [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > > Is Notes at least able to forward all incoming mail to an address? > > > > Our Exchange server doesn't have IMAP enabled either, so I've got some > > scripts that make it push incoming mail out to a unix box. Exchange can > > only forward, not redirect/bounce, so the unix box has scripts that strip > > off the outside fwd container on incoming. So far it works well. > > Hmm, cool. I will talk to her and maybe set up a Linux box for our > mail. We have this huge server for Notes, yet all we use from the > whole thing is mail. Only other problem I guess is the address book. > I wonder if I can export it to something readable by mutt. If it can be queried externally at all (LDAP, etc.) you should be able to query it directly from mutt. Though I haven't set that up here yet and just have a local address book for most of my contacts, and it works well enough it hasn't bothered me. I guess it helps most of the people here have standard-format user names. msg30556/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Windows Bosses
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Sven Guckes wrote: > > So, your boss using Outlook is really a minor thing > > in the grand scheme of things right now. The fact > > that you HAVE a boss right now is a godsend. > > err... my boss does not use Outlook. No way. "You" in the generic form. ;-) -Ken
Re: fcc and reply as in pine
Richard -- ...and then Richard P. Groenewegen said... % % On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 09:22:25AM -0400, darren chamberlain wrote: % > Ouch, that's a lot of work. I think this will do it: % > % > fcc-save-hook . +%O % > % > The . applies the hook to all messages, and the %O turns into the % > before-the-@ part of the recipient address. More to the point, %O means "the original save target" before mutt started applying any rules. I expect it would be either the addressee name or sent (whatever your sent mailbox name is), though perhaps not even the latter (someone should check, and, no, it won't be I). % % Cool! I didn't known this (well, of course I didn't!). Great, I trust there were other fcc-save-hook settings without a lovely default setting that were causing this, because if you simply turn on $save_name then mutt will usually save in folders by addressee name. If there were, then you need this anyway because you need a default setting for the hook so that your next email doesn't also get saved in =someguy :-) % thanks. HTH & HAND % % Richard :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg30558/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Exchange Exchange!
On Aug 30, Sven Guckes [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > * Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 13:19]: > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > > > Is Notes at least able to forward all incoming mail to an address? > > > > > > Our Exchange server doesn't have IMAP enabled either, so I've got some > > > scripts that make it push incoming mail out to a unix box. Exchange can > > > only forward, not redirect/bounce, so the unix box has scripts that strip > > > off the outside fwd container on incoming. So far it works well. > > > > Hmm, cool. I will talk to her and maybe set up a Linux box for our > > mail. We have this huge server for Notes, yet all we use from the > > whole thing is mail. Only other problem I guess is the address book. > > I wonder if I can export it to something readable by mutt. > > LDAP and the query_command spring to mind... but this > ain't the "workarounds for exchange servers" list, is it? ;-) I don't remember it being the "quit-your-job-if-your-boss-uses-Outlook" advocacy list, either. Considering that some of us are talking about just another way to get mail to where Mutt can read it, I'm not considered about topicalness. msg30559/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Mutt and Mail dir
Here is my .muttrc file [darcym@jordan darcym]$ cat .muttrc set folder=$HOME/Maildir set spoolfile=$HOME/Maildir set from="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" set hostname=mail.mdlan.net When ever I read message and quit out I get the message "move read messages to mbox" the messages then dissapear. I thought the point of setting folder and spoolfile to Maildir was to read mail in Maildir ??? where is mutt getting the idea to use mbox ?? how can I read messages that have been moved to mbox ?? should even read message not be stored in Maildir ?? Thanks, Matt. / /\ / / \ __ /_/ /\ \ /_/\ __\ \ \_\ \ Matt Darcy \ \ \/ /\\ \ \/ / GBIT -EMEA, Bristol, UK \ \ \/ \\ \ /Hewlett-Packard \ \ /\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ Telnet312 8859 \ \ \_\/ \ \ \ Telephone +44 (0) 117 312 8859 \ \ \\_\/ Mobile +44 (0) 776 766 0991 \_\/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a change towards freedom (was: Outlook and "inline attachments")
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 02:34:59PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > > anyway, what good is it to wait to change jobs? > if all changed jobs then they's swap one place > with windows with another place using windows. > the change must be within the system itself. > and i am not only talking about operating systems.. > > there needs be a change towards freedom of choice. > > > then again, i'm not sure whether giving users a > choice will make all of them happy. see my page > http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/mutt/forwhom.php3 > > still - the bottom line is: > if your boss is too dense to realize that he is using broken > software then he should pay you twice as much to use it, too! > > Sven [twice as much *at least*] Heh - that would be nice. Of course from the employer's point of view They are already paying us to use software thats broken and if it means so much to us then they'll pay us half as much to use software that not broken. Ouch! The market sets the pays scales, not the value of the work done, unfortunately. I think that as Linux gets a bigger market share that the market will eventually recognize its value. However most companies are going to continue to use, ahem "Less Elegant" software such as Outlook and Lotus Notes because of the integrated groupware functions they have. When the Linux world has a mail client with integrated groupware functions then we will have a very strong argument for exiting from those "less elegant" software products. Is anybody working on a plug-in for mutt to add this kind of thing ? Of course knowing how much I have to learn about mutt there probably is some obvious groupware functionality which I just don't know about. :) -- Jeff Kinz, Director, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" copyright 1995-2002. Use restricted to non-UCE uses. Any other use is an acceptance of the offer at http://www.ultranet.com/~jkinz/policy.html. "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" copyright 2002. Use is restricted. Any use is an acceptance of the offer at http://users.rcn.com/jkinz/policy.html. (¬_-o) //\ eLviintuaxbilse/\\ V_/_ _\_V
Re: Mutt and Mail dir
DARCY,MATTHEW (Non-HP-UnitedKingdom,ex2) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered: > [darcym@jordan darcym]$ cat .muttrc > set folder=$HOME/Maildir > set spoolfile=$HOME/Maildir > set from="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > set hostname=mail.mdlan.net > When ever I read message and quit out I get the message "move read > messages to mbox" the messages then dissapear. I thought the point of > setting folder and spoolfile to Maildir was to read mail in Maildir ? set move=no > where is mutt getting the idea to use mbox ? 6.3.94. mbox Type: path Default: "~/mbox" This specifies the folder into which read mail in your $spoolfile folder will be appended. HTH, Michael -- "Are [Linux users] lemmings collectively jumping off of the cliff of reliable, well-engineered commercial software?" (By Matt Welsh) PGP-Key: http://www-stud.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/~tatgeml/public.key
Re: Emulating (gaaack) Outlook attribution
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > Though I haven't set that up here yet and just have a local address book > for most of my contacts, and it works well enough it hasn't bothered me. I > guess it helps most of the people here have standard-format user names. This is government. The address book is a mess. :) -Ken
Re: display-address and display-subject
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 05:12:41PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote:
> extract the Subject line with "grep":
> macro index S "grep -i '^subject:'\n"
Didn't work for me; could that happen due to the inbox being an IMAP
one?
> change the display of the folder index:
> macro index S ":set index_format="%3C %{%b %d} %s"
This one worked, thanks much :) !
However, piping seems to be better since it would show the full line,
even if it is longer than the terminal width. Any idea why it didn't
work?
Besides, seems that I can use it to convert an unquoted subject to
another encoding.
With kind regards,
Baurjan.
Re: LC_CTYPE vs. charset (il)logic (was: Re: overriding the charset for headers)
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 09:03:14AM -0700, Sam Peterson wrote: > Try keeping your locale to en_US.ISO8859-1. I think, provided > LC_CTYPE allows for 8-bits, you should be able to set $charset to > something different from LC_CTYPE, without problems. At least, I'm > able to do this with $charset=euc-jp. Me, too -- I've got fully functional setup thanks to mutt developers, Debian package maintainers and Marco d'Itri, Debian mutt maintainer. I had asked just an explanation _why_ mutt displays characters that way. With kind regards, Baurjan.
Re: overriding the charset for headers
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 05:24:44PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > > That is why I think it would be much better to have manual charset > > override for headers, just like the one we have for bodies. > > IMHO, this functionality should be implemented in MUA. > > this would only work around the problems > created by bad mail clients, wouldn't it? Yes, and "only" would be sufficient for me :) . > > However, mutt is the best MUA > > with regard to bad input tolerance. I think it > > lacks this feature, which is already implemented > > in the source, but is inapplicable to headers. I > > somehow the prospect of mutt becoming a repair tool for > the brokenness of other mailers does not make me happy. With respect for your opinion. However, I like mutt especially for these features, and I think such features give it flexibility -- mutt's main strength, IMHO. > i'd rather tell other users to not use the broken > mailers at all and thereby let them die. > life's too short for bad software. Life's too short to convince all users of bad software :) . So, let me restate my question: I'm looking for a local way to convert unquoted or malquoted headers. I would greatly appreciate any help regarding the pipes, or Japanese patches doing header conversion, or any method that would work with IMAP mailboxes. Thanks in advance, Baurjan.
threading question
I find something odd about the threading tree. Imagine you have two messages one under the other in a thread three. In one set of those the child message is a direct reply to the parent. In the second set they are both replies to a message that is gone, so they are both tied together in a tree, but at the same level basically. The thread tree looks exactly the same for both sets. Does this make sense? If so, shouldn't the trees look a little different, as in the child of the parent that was a direct reply be indented slightly, or at least somehow differentiated? -Ken
Re: threading question
* Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 19:03]: > I find something odd about the threading tree. Imagine you have two > messages one under the other in a thread three. In one set of those > the child message is a direct reply to the parent. In the second set > they are both replies to a message that is gone, so they are both tied > together in a tree, but at the same level basically. The thread tree > looks exactly the same for both sets. Does this make sense? If so, > shouldn't the trees look a little different, as in the child of the > parent that was a direct reply be indented slightly, or at least > somehow differentiated? "maybe". definitely. Make a suggestion, draw a picture, post the url! Sven [ever so practical]
Re: threading question
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Sven Guckes wrote: > * Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 19:03]: > > I find something odd about the threading tree. Imagine you have two > > messages one under the other in a thread three. In one set of those > > the child message is a direct reply to the parent. In the second set > > they are both replies to a message that is gone, so they are both tied > > together in a tree, but at the same level basically. The thread tree > > looks exactly the same for both sets. Does this make sense? If so, > > shouldn't the trees look a little different, as in the child of the > > parent that was a direct reply be indented slightly, or at least > > somehow differentiated? > > "maybe". definitely. > Make a suggestion, > draw a picture, > post the url! Hah. :) Better yet, when I can collect my thoughts on it, I will send it to the list. ASCII! -Ken
Re: threading question
At 15:03 -0400 30 Aug 2002, Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I find something odd about the threading tree. Imagine you have two > messages one under the other in a thread three. In one set of those > the child message is a direct reply to the parent. In the second set > they are both replies to a message that is gone, so they are both tied > together in a tree, but at the same level basically. The thread tree > looks exactly the same for both sets. Does this make sense? If so, > shouldn't the trees look a little different, as in the child of the > parent that was a direct reply be indented slightly, or at least > somehow differentiated? I'm not entirely convinced that I understand what you're saying, but does setting the hide_missing option help? -- Aaron Schrab [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.schrab.com/aaron/ To err is human, to forgive, beyond the scope of the Operating System.
Re: threading question
At 15:28 -0500 30 Aug 2002, I wrote: > I'm not entirely convinced that I understand what you're saying, but > does setting the hide_missing option help? That should read "unsetting the hide_missing option". The option is set by default. -- Aaron Schrab [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.schrab.com/aaron/ Avoid the Gates of Hell. Use Linux
Re: threading question
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Aaron Schrab wrote: > At 15:28 -0500 30 Aug 2002, I wrote: > > I'm not entirely convinced that I understand what you're saying, but > > does setting the hide_missing option help? > > That should read "unsetting the hide_missing option". The option > is set by default. No, my comments have nothing to do with limiting. I'll draw out an example of what I'm saying. As you can see, it was hard to explain what I was thinking. -Ken
Re: threading question
At 16:40 -0400 30 Aug 2002, Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Aaron Schrab wrote: > > That should read "unsetting the hide_missing option". The option > > is set by default. > > No, my comments have nothing to do with limiting. I'll draw out an The hide_missing option doesn't have anything to do with limiting either. -- Aaron Schrab [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.schrab.com/aaron/ He's not dead, he's electroencephalographically challenged.
Re: threading question
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Aaron Schrab wrote: > > No, my comments have nothing to do with limiting. I'll draw out an > > The hide_missing option doesn't have anything to do with limiting > either. Really? I didn't know what hide_missing was, so I looked in the manual and this is what it says: hide_missing Type: boolean Default: yes When set, mutt will not show the presence of messages that are hidden by limiting, in the thread tree.
Re: threading question
At 17:03 -0400 30 Aug 2002, Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Aaron Schrab wrote: > > > No, my comments have nothing to do with limiting. I'll draw out an > > > > The hide_missing option doesn't have anything to do with limiting > > either. > > Really? I didn't know what hide_missing was, so I looked in the > manual and this is what it says: Yes, really. > hide_missing > > Type: boolean > Default: yes > > When set, mutt will not show the presence of messages that are hidden > by limiting, in the thread tree. Documentation bug. The explanations for hide_missing and hide_limited are switched. -- Aaron Schrab [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.schrab.com/aaron/ "MSDOS didn't get as bad as it is overnight -- it took over ten years of careful development." -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: threading question
* Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-30 17:03 -0400]: > On Fri, Aug 30, 2002, Aaron Schrab wrote: > > > No, my comments have nothing to do with limiting. I'll draw out an > > > > The hide_missing option doesn't have anything to do with limiting > > either. > > Really? I didn't know what hide_missing was, so I looked in the > manual and this is what it says: > > hide_missing > > Type: boolean > Default: yes > > When set, mutt will not show the presence of messages that are hidden by limiting, >in the thread tree. IIRC the descriptions of hide_missing and hide_limited should be swapped. Try unsetting it, or perhaps hide_top_missing. Nicolas
Re: Emulating (gaaack) Outlook attribution
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 08:10:44AM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote: >On Aug 29, Ken Weingold [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002, Peter T. Abplanalp wrote: >> > you can always try but it has been my experience that these people >> > don't want to change to anything other than M$. if your boss is still >> > semi technical this might work; however, if he has gone totally over >> > to the dark side of management, he is a lost cause. >> >> Wow, lucky me that my boss uses mailx or Pine (hey, consider the >> alternatives) and she was into the idea of us setting up something for >> ourselves to use the Unix MUA of our choice for work email, but we >> have Notes and it's a lost cause. We can't enable POP or IMAP either. >> And you thought Exchange was bad. > >Is Notes at least able to forward all incoming mail to an address? > >Our Exchange server doesn't have IMAP enabled either, so I've got some >scripts that make it push incoming mail out to a unix box. Exchange can >only forward, not redirect/bounce, so the unix box has scripts that strip >off the outside fwd container on incoming. So far it works well. That's a neat idea. If they ever take away my POP access I may try that. -- Michael Herman msg30577/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
