is this outdated?
http://www.angio.net/misc/mail.html says the following: Why use IMAP locally? If you refile messages between mail folders directly using Mutt, you'll store invalid X-UID headers into the wrong mail folders. When you then check your mail with IMAP, the IMAP server will decide that you've goofed up your mailbox, and renumber it for you, and change the IMAP uidvalidity identifier. Isync will then barf. You could accomplish this by having Mutt strip out the X-UID header on a refile, but this way is much more clean. Is this still accurate, or did it only apply to some 1.3 version and has been fixed in 1.4? --Greg
Re: run fetchmail online
* Alain Barthélemy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [15-10-2002 20:50]:
> Hello,
>
> Just a Mutt-Newbie question
>
> If I want to run the instruction #> fetchmail -d0 online
> is this line in .muttrc OK
>
> macro pager G "!fetchmail -d0\r"
Why not try it? What is there to screw up?
Your signature is actually longer then your question. Wow.
> --
[1]
> Who was more to be pitied
>
> Cassandra whom nobody listened to
> or
> those who were not listening to Cassandra
I first thought this was a question too. Please use proper sigdashes
("-- ") at [1].
> Alain Barthélemy
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Voyez mon site web sur:
> http://bartydeux.gminformatique.com
> Ma généalogie et la petite histoire de Herve et sa région
Blabla.
--
René Clerc - ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any other invention,
with the possible exceptions of handguns and Tequilla.
-Mitch Ratcliffe
msg31858/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Displaying PGP signature *after* the message?
[I know it might have bad security consequences, but I really don't like to see most of my screen eaten by the outout of GPG checking PGP signatures.] Is there a way to display the message "Good signature from..." *after* the message, not between the headers and the messages? Or to hide it unless specifically called? (Yes, I've look at the documentation and in many .muttrc at www.dotfiles.com.)
Re: Displaying PGP signature *after* the message?
* Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16-10-2002 14:52]: [about PGP signatures] > Or to hide it unless specifically called? unset pgp_verify_sig -- René Clerc - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) There is a definite parallel between shots of tequila and a woman's breasts. One is not enough and three are too many. msg31860/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Displaying PGP signature *after* the message?
On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 03:02:31PM +0200, René Clerc wrote: > * Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16-10-2002 14:52]: > > [about PGP signatures] > > > Or to hide it unless specifically called? > > unset pgp_verify_sig > > -- > René Clerc - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > There is a definite parallel between shots of tequila and a woman's breasts. > One is not enough and three are too many. Mutt GPG integration is so very good it's almost a crime to suggest a change. In a perfect world, I think I'd want to know only if the signature did *NOT* check out against the keyserver copy. Otherwise I'd prefer the appearance of the signature text to be subject to an on/off switch. It is remarkably clean the way the keychain gets updated. If I ever had something I wanted to say in secret, with mutt, there is a good chance I actually could. I've been set up to use PGP since 1993, but never sent encrypted messages because key exchange was so cumbersome and because those with whom I'd have a need to speak privately are too intimidated by all the steps necessary with other email clients. For this reason I'd like to always verify, always fetch keys (that are not already on my keychain), but only see signature verification failures. Everything else should be invisible. Well, maybe a rotating slash to indicate fetch activity between me and the keyserver. Then again, all my life I've wanted things I can't have. JPK msg31861/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Autoview images in the pager -> w3m
On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 03:18:23PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > * Viktor Lakics <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-05 12:21]: > > Has anyone ever tried to work out how to autoview graphics inside mutt? > > > > To illustrate the point look at this screenshot: > > http://lakics.homelinux.net/screenshot/shot.jpg > > > > This shows multi-gnome-terminal with a horizontal split, > > the upper part is running mutt, the lower part is running > > w3m, which opened up the horizontal split from inside mutt > > when I right-clicked the appropriate URL. As you can see, > > w3m shows inline graphics, is very fast, and makes easy > > to check html pages or urls in "sort of text mode". > > > > As was wondering whether anyone tried to hack the mailcap, > > mutt, w3m trio in a way that html messages could be shown > > in autoview with graphics inside? > > well, w3m already does what you want - so please use it. > > all you need is this "auto_view text/html" in your mutt setup > and the following in your mailcap file: > > text/html ; w3m -dump -force_html %s ; copiousoutput > text/htm; w3m -dump -force_html %s ; copiousoutput > message/html; w3m -dump -force_html %s ; copiousoutput > message/htm ; w3m -dump -force_html %s ; copiousoutput > > and you probably need a fairly recent version of w3m for this, too. > however, w3m's changelog is not very elaborate... > > more sreenshots about w3m in action: > http://www.w3m.org/screenshots.html > > Sven > > -- > Sven Guckes [EMAIL PROTECTED] > W3M a text browser for the world wide web > W3M http://w3m.org and http://w3m.sf.net > W3M http://ei5nazha.yz.yamagata-u.ac.jp/~aito/w3m/eng This is *really* nice. I saw the page at http://w3m.org a few months ago. I wrongly concluded that there was no on-going development since the date on w3m.org is: Tuesday August 01, 2000 02:43 P Your reference to http://w3m.sf.net cleared my confusion. Thanks. http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/w3m/w3m-0.3.1.tar.gz?use_mirror=unc The July 2002 release leaves links and lynx looking dusty and beaten. Regards, JPK msg31862/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Autoview images in the pager -> w3m
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, PeterKorman wrote: > This is *really* nice. I saw the page at http://w3m.org a > few months ago. I wrongly concluded that there was no on-going > development since the date on w3m.org is: > > Tuesday August 01, 2000 02:43 P > > Your reference to http://w3m.sf.net cleared my confusion. Thanks. > > http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/w3m/w3m-0.3.1.tar.gz?use_mirror=unc > > The July 2002 release leaves links and lynx looking dusty and beaten. not really. The "inline" images are actually windows that overlay the xterm, and are not event-coordinated. So what you're seeing is in effect multiple external viewer windows that are positioned to match the text. Nice - but doesn't exactly make things obsolete. It can be annoying to use w3m in an xterm which is running 'screen'. As is usual, I find that between lynx/w3m/opera/netscape, some sites do not work well on one or more of those. -- T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net
Re: Displaying PGP signature *after* the message?
* PeterKorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16-10-2002 16:30]: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 03:02:31PM +0200, René Clerc wrote: > > * Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16-10-2002 14:52]: > > > > [about PGP signatures] > > > > > Or to hide it unless specifically called? > > > > unset pgp_verify_sig > > In a perfect world, I think I'd want to know only > if the signature did *NOT* check out against the > keyserver copy. The part of his question I replied to, is the part that doesn't require a patch for mutt, if I'm correct. I believe my reply is valid; if you want to hide GnuPG output, then don't verify. [...] > I'd like to always verify, always fetch > keys (that are not already on my keychain), but only see > signature verification failures. Everything else should > be invisible. Well, maybe a rotating slash to indicate > fetch activity between me and the keyserver. This requires a patch. Or a nifty $display_filter setting. Personally, I don't like keyrings with hundreds of keys. So I don't use the auto-key-retrieve option of gpg. If a post to, let's say, mutt-users is signed (like mine are), I usually don't feel the direct need to verify the signature (exactly _what_ would be the benefit of this?). If I _want_ to, I can (by retrieving the key and playing around with $pgp_verify_sig). -- René Clerc - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) The burning question on the mind of every dyslexic existentialist: "Is there a dog?" msg31864/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Displaying PGP signature *after* the message?
On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 07:35:01PM +0200, René Clerc wrote: > * PeterKorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16-10-2002 16:30]: > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 03:02:31PM +0200, René Clerc wrote: > > > * Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16-10-2002 14:52]: > > > > > > [about PGP signatures] > > > > > > > Or to hide it unless specifically called? > > > > > > unset pgp_verify_sig > > > > In a perfect world, I think I'd want to know only > > if the signature did *NOT* check out against the > > keyserver copy. > > The part of his question I replied to, is the part that doesn't > require a patch for mutt, if I'm correct. I believe my reply is > valid; if you want to hide GnuPG output, then don't verify. > > [...] > > > I'd like to always verify, always fetch > > keys (that are not already on my keychain), but only see > > signature verification failures. Everything else should > > be invisible. Well, maybe a rotating slash to indicate > > fetch activity between me and the keyserver. > > This requires a patch. Or a nifty $display_filter setting. > > Personally, I don't like keyrings with hundreds of keys. So I don't > use the auto-key-retrieve option of gpg. > > If a post to, let's say, mutt-users is signed (like mine are), I > usually don't feel the direct need to verify the signature (exactly > _what_ would be the benefit of this?). If I _want_ to, I can (by > retrieving the key and playing around with $pgp_verify_sig). On the slim chance that your question is not rhetorical I'll hazard an answer. >would be the benefit of this? It mitigates against 2 of my weaknesses. Bad memory and lazyness. Patience seems to be something of which I have enough; maybe too much. I have enough patience to wait for keyserver response. A keyserver response wait tells me that I've never before read a message (so far I've never encountered a downed key server at the site I'm using) signed by this person. If I always verify, then I don't have to remember the verify command. On occasions when I want to verify I don't need to care how it's done because I've already done it. It might all go back to my mother not allowing me to purchase the secret decoder ring on the back of the rice crispies box. Ever since then I've always thought things related to encryption were cool. JPK msg31865/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Pressing a key after command execution
Hello Mutt Users, I took the macro from Alain some threads before, to fetch mail by one keypress. Like this: macro index "" "!fetchmail &\r" macro pager "" "!fetchmail &\r" macro browser "" "!fetchmail &\r" Is there a way to get rid of the "Please press a key" message after executing the macro? I tried "!fetchmail &\r\r" but this wont work :-( regards Christoph
Re: Pressing a key after command execution
* Christoph Kampe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-17 01:16 +0200]: > I took the macro from Alain some threads before, to fetch mail by one > keypress. > Like this: > macro index "" "!fetchmail &\r" > macro pager "" "!fetchmail &\r" > macro browser "" "!fetchmail &\r" > > Is there a way to get rid of the "Please press a key" message after > executing the macro? Search the manual for wait_key. Nicolas
Re: Pressing a key after command execution
Christoph Kampe wrote: > Is there a way to get rid of the "Please press a key" message after > executing the macro? unset wait_key
send-hook and multiple identities
This doesn't quite work. * [EMAIL PROTECTED] default * [EMAIL PROTECTED] if replying to a message addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * [EMAIL PROTECTED] if original addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * etc. I know there is some aspect of the send-hook functionality I am not understanding. Can someone give me a clue? Thanks. Brian == send-hook '~C @bch\.net' 'my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' send-hook '~C bman@bch\.net' 'my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' send-hook '~C @alcleaders\.com' 'my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' #send-hook '!~C "@alcleaders\.com"' 'unmy_hdr *'
Re: send-hook and multiple identities
Brian C. Hill ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered: > This doesn't quite work. > > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] default set from="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] if replying to a message addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] if original addressed to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > * etc. set alternates = "([EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|...)" set reverse_name HTH, Michael -- There are no threads in a.b.p.erotica, so there's no gain in using a threaded news reader. (Unknown source) PGP-Key: http://www-stud.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/~tatgeml/public.key
Re: send-hook and multiple identities
Brian C. Hill wrote: > This doesn't quite work. > > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] default > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] if replying to a message addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] if original addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > * etc. > > I know there is some aspect of the send-hook functionality I > am not understanding. Can someone give me a clue? > == > send-hook '~C @bch\.net' 'my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > send-hook '~C bman@bch\.net' 'my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > send-hook '~C @alcleaders\.com' 'my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > #send-hook '!~C "@alcleaders\.com"' 'unmy_hdr *' The simplest way to do this is to set $reverse_name and define $alternates properly. Other than that, I'm not sure, but my guess is that you need to mess around with the quoting. I don't use any send-hooks like this, but I use folder hooks like this: folder-hook =lists:foo 'my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Will Yardley)' Might also be a good idea to have a generic hook; ie: send-hook . 'my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' -- Will Yardley input: william < @ hq . newdream . net . >
Re: Displaying PGP signature *after* the message?
At 10:27 AM EDT on October 16 PeterKorman sent off: > In a perfect world, I think I'd want to know only > if the signature did *NOT* check out against the > keyserver copy. IMHO, that would weaken the point of crypto signatures. First, most* signature failures are innocent, being due to MTA mangling along the way, like escaping periods at the start of a line. By only seeing gpg when there's a problem, it could freak you out that much more when it happens, and when you verify with the sender, give you** the impression that it's worthless. But it's not. All the signatures that *do* check out OK are saying something about the legitimacy of their messages. By not checking good sigs, you are lowering their status to the same level as unsigned messages, so gpg users can't win either way :-( * in my limited experience. ** and by you I probably mean more newbieish people who inherit your .muttrc. Admittedly that problem mostly goes away if you have the %Z flag (IIRC) in your index, so you can easily see which ones are signed, even if you don't check every signature. (I don't on mailing lists.) At 2:04 PM EDT on October 16 PeterKorman sent off: Content-Description: Why I automatically verify > On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 07:35:01PM +0200, Ren? Clerc wrote: > > * PeterKorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16-10-2002 16:30]: > > > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 03:02:31PM +0200, Ren? Clerc wrote: > > > > * Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [16-10-2002 14:52]: > > > > > > > > > Or to hide it unless specifically called? > > > > > > > > unset pgp_verify_sig > > > > >would be the benefit of this? > > It mitigates against 2 of my weaknesses. Bad memory and lazyness. > Patience seems to be something of which I have enough; maybe > too much. I have enough patience to wait for keyserver response. > A keyserver response wait tells me that I've never before read a > message (so far I've never encountered a downed key server at > the site I'm using) Oh, so you *are* a newbie! ;-) Pardon my svenning, but key servers just don't seem to stay up for very long. > If I always verify, then I don't have to remember the verify command. Put this in your .muttrc: # Check a signature. Thanks to David Champion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> macro index \Cv "set pgp_verify_sig=yesset pgp_verify_sig=no" "Verify PGP signature" macro pager \Cv "iset pgp_verify_sig=yesset pgp_verify_sig=no" "Verify PGP signature" mnemonic: control-v for Control Verify. I like to read, then verify if necessary, which is more or less what the subject asks for. -- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. - O. Wilde Robert I. Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://astro.utoronto.ca/~reid/ PGP Key: http://astro.utoronto.ca/~reid/pgp.html msg31872/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
