Re: Is mutt extensible with a programming language?
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:52:39PM +0800, XeCycle wrote: > I think it'd be nice to integrate some language > to muttrc, thus making customization easier. (I prefer perl > for this task~) > > Or --- Is there a fork of mutt that already support this? I use a mutt+Lua combination, but I only put Lua hooks into a few specific spots so it's pretty limited in what it can do. For example I use Lua functions to label the subject lines for messages from a whitelist of senders. -Dave Dodge
Re: Is mutt extensible with a programming language?
XeCycle writes: > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 03:04:09AM +0200, lee wrote: >> >> Gnus has one big disadvantage: It can be awfully slow. > > Yes... It's more than *awfully* slow. Now I use it as a > newsreader, subscribing several groups at gmane and also > some RSS feeds. Mixing them with mail will probably be even > more slow, which is also a reason for my insisting on mutt. So far, I have found only two things gnus is slow with: * processing incoming email is *awfully* slow * creating a summary buffer when there are *many* unread messages to show The second one isn't really an issue. The first one is currently very annoying because I still have a lot of messages that need to be processed in the process of switching from maildir to nnml --- and that's mainly my fault because I started doing it the wrong way. Still that should be much faster. It's not a fair comparison, though, because it's something mutt doesn't do. >> Mutt is awesome and totally reliable; gnus is awesome and extremely >> powerful. (I can't tell yet how reliable gnus is.) > > Recently I'm also trying Chromium; I use Firefox with > Pentadactyl now. In Chromium, I didn't find anything > comparable to Vimperator/Pentadactyl, but it's much faster > than Firefox. Well, these comparisons are similar. Chromium is a MUA? I tried it and found it can't even display PDF documents and cannot be configured to do anything but display a web page. It isn't noticeably faster than konqueror (with webkit) or seamonkey.
Re: Revisiting: application/pgp-signature is unsupported
On Friday, 24 June 2011 at 00:00, Lars Hecking wrote: > > > I am facing the same problem now, but may have a bit more information. > > Original message has a multipart/signed structure with a qp text and > a signature part, all of which is wrapped into a multipart/mixed > structure, presumably done by the list server for the purpose of adding > a (text, 7-bit) footer. Exchange flattens the struture into a multipart/ > mixed with a qp text part, a application/pgp-signature part in base64, > and another base64 text part. > > I presume mutt needs multipart/signed. Sounds like a reasonable guess. I don't suppose you could send in a message that has been mangled this way? It would make it easier to test.
Re: mutt shows wrong size of message on mime messages
On Wednesday, 22 June 2011 at 08:35, jurri...@rivierenland.xs4all.nl wrote: > From: David Champion > Date: Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 03:25:46PM -0500 > > * On 21 Jun 2011, Jurriaan wrote: > > > on screen, I see things like > > > > > > 50 21-06-11 Xx Xxxx ( 1.2K) Xx x > > > 51 21-06-11 Xxx (13433K) Xxxx > > > > > > The sizes of messages with mime components (mostly html messages) are > > > much to big. Given that this is a router, without strace or gdb (well, > > > > Are you certain? That doesn't look too surprising for an HTML message > > with inline images. > > If I save the message to disk, it's only 13 kilobytes. There are no > inline images, it a text-part and the same as html, but no images. I'll > append the headers below. I'm not too sure I'd be happy receiving 133 > megabytes messages... > > > > > Have you tried copying it to another machine and running mutt on it > > there? > > Yes, on a regular AMD64 machine running Debian Unstable and mutt > 1.5.21-5 from Debian, it shows as 13K in the index. > There is no Content-Length field in the headers at all. Still, I think > mutt is doing something to determine the length of the message - perhaps > something else that just looking at the file. Might be related to this patch: https://dev.mutt.org/trac/changeset/5d96f24efa85 If you can rebuild mutt on your router, try reverting that.
