Re: Send message as inline using mutt command line in script
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 04:52:11AM +0100, David Woodfall wrote: I have a script that emails a cover.txt message plus a pdf attachment, but the message, while being readable, shows as an attachment too: [-- Attachment #1 --] [-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.4K --] Is there a way of having it send inline? That's just how MIME works, that is, since the message has one non-ASCII part, the entire message must be MIME encoded with a plaintext portion. If you wanted, you could uuencode the attachment, but using MIME is the better practice. For recipients with a GUI mail client, this should appear as you'd expect - a text message with an attached file. In mutt, the text should appear "inline" (that is, without using an external viewer or going to the file menu), but how else would you expect to see the attached file if it doesn't show you the various components of the message? w Ok. Guess I can live with it then. Cheers.
Re: Quotes [Was: saving messages to files/permissions?]
On 19.06.15 17:11, David Champion wrote: > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> Greetings all, Not sure if this may be a > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> debian problem but > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> I often save individual incomming emails > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> in seperate files in my home directory > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> with the mutt "s" command. > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> In any session, the first time I save to > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> a particular file it goes fine. > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> However if I try to save another message > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> to the same file, I get "Permission > Ian> Erik> Mattias> Chris> Tom> denied." > Ian> > Ian> Erik> Chris> I never wrote any of the above! > Ian> > Ian> Erik> And the quoting does show that. Compare the inner "Chris > Ian> Erik> Bannister" quote with the outer: In the outer, the leftmost > Ian> Erik> '>' ladder links your name with the last quoted sentence. In > Ian> Erik> your inner, the third '>' ladder links your name with nothing > Ian> Erik> at all, i.e. no attribution to you. The whole of the central > Ian> Erik> block of quoted text is solidly attributed to Tom Fowle by an > Ian> Erik> unbroken fourth '>' ladder, is it not? > Ian> > Ian> Now compare this correct, but horribly complex analysis (can a > Ian> human really do that habitually?) with the SuperCite "nonstandard" > Ian> [1] quoting I use. Which is easier to read, honestly? If it is > Ian> a matter of colorizing in the mutt pager, a simple setting of > Ian> quote_regexp in .muttrc fixes that. (This should count as ob-mutt > Ian> content.) > > Are we really going to do this? ISTM that you're painting it more complex than the reality. It is easier than the above with the original simpler presentation, where each attribution begins at the top of its own '>' column. There is then no more effort than following a straight vertical line directly to the author. One squint - gotcha! I'm sorry, but I fail to see how that can be made out to be difficult. (If the font were tall, and '>' substituted with '|', then David's text above would be joined to his attribution by a solid line, not just a line of '>', but the simplicity is the same. If he hadn't munged the others, then they would be similarly simple vertical lines to follow with a glance.) I do it when reading an email. I do it and double check when trimming quoted text, to ensure that the attribution line for each quoting column not trimmed is still present. It is not an effort that is in any way irksome. What I like very much is that Vim perfectly maintains such quoting when reflowing quoted paragraphs, e.g with gq} - something I do when trimming from or to the middle of a line, or when the lines are too long. (Granted, fullquoters can make the '>' columns overly long, but that's the fault of failing to trim quoted text to that relevant to the reply.) Erik -- Habit is habit, and not to be flung out of the window by any man, but coaxed down-stairs a step at a time. - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar
Re: Quotes
On 19.06.15 10:34, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > On 2015-06-19 18:59 +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote: > > > If email is uncomfortable, may I recommend the newfangled twitterface > > thing? > > A look at the top of supercite.el shows the first version was released > in 1993. So the supercite style is maybe a decade younger, at most, > than your "traditional" style. > > I like your tone, though. (Chuckle) In comparison, I'm loyal to awk, because it serves me so well - but accept others prefer more recent inventions. Trying to sell the original and best would be a thankless task. Unfortunately I don't know what the supercite style looks like. If it is the "Ian> Jim> Fred> Herbet>" style appearing elsewhere on this thread, then ISTM significantly less readable than the more familiar common form. If it is the: "Ian> . Herbet> ... " form, than that's no harder than following a straight line. I've never heard of that being deprecated, though I've only encountered it rarely in list posts. Erik -- The tools we use have a profound and devious influence on our thinking habits, and therefore on our thinking abilities. -Edsgar W. Dijkstra
Swedish chars in attached gpg-encrypted message fails
Hi, I have a slightly annoying problem. I'm from Sweden and I occasionally communicate with other swedish people using pgp and I've stumbled upon this problem: If I encrypt a message containg any of the swedish letters "åÅäÄöÖ" using inline format everythings works just fine but when I encrypt it in the standard way, i.e sending the encrypted message as attachment the swedish letters get messed up when the recipient decrypts the message (not in mutt as for as I know). For example if I encrypt the message "Secret åäö ÅÄÖ" and send it to myself and then decrypt it in mutt it shows exactly; headers & stuff then: "[-- The following data is PGP/MIME encrypted --] Secret åäö ÅÄÖ [-- End of PGP/MIME encrypted data --]" but if I save the actual msg.asc file and decrypt it manually from commandline I get "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Secret =E5=E4=F6 =C5=C4=D6" And this apparently what any recipient gets upon decryption. Any swedish char in terminal shows up just fine on my system (debian) and my locale is LANG=en_US.UTF-8 and I don't have any other problems with Swedish chars as far as I know. But something goes wrong. I basically have two questions, 1. How to fix this? 2. Why doesn't this problem show up when encrypting inline style? I'm sorry if this is stupid, I know very little about charsets and encodings. My cryptopart of .muttrc looks like this: #gpg set pgp_use_gpg_agent = no set pgp_sign_as = 616BB08C set pgp_timeout = 3600 set crypt_autosign = yes set crypt_replyencrypt = yes set pgp_decode_command="gpg %?p?--passphrase-fd 0? --no-verbose --batch --output - %f" set pgp_verify_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output - --verify %s %f" set pgp_decrypt_command="gpg --passphrase-fd 0 --no-verbose --batch --output - %f" set pgp_sign_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor --detach-sign \ --textmode %?a?-u %a? %f" set pgp_clearsign_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor \ --textmode --clearsign %?a?-u %a? %f" set pgp_encrypt_only_command="/usr/lib/mutt/pgpewrap gpg --batch --quiet --no-verbose --output - --encrypt \ --textmode --armor --always-trust --encrypt-to 616BB08C -- -r %r -- %f" set pgp_encrypt_sign_command="/usr/lib/mutt/pgpewrap gpg --passphrase-fd 0 --batch --quiet --no-verbose \ --textmode --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust %--encrypt-to 616BB08C -- -r %r -- %f" set pgp_import_command="gpg --no-verbose --import -v %f" set pgp_export_command="gpg--no-verbose --export --armor %r" set pgp_verify_key_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --fingerprint --check-sigs %r" set pgp_list_pubring_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --with-colons --list-keys %r" set pgp_list_secring_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --with-colons --list-secret-keys %r" set pgp_good_sign="^gpg:Good signature from" message-hook '!(~g|~G) ~b"^-BEGIN\ PGP\ (SIGNED\ )?MESSAGE"' "exec check-traditional-pgp" Mutt version Mutt 1.5.23 / gpg 1.4.18 @ debian stable. Any help or pointers on how to resolve this would be highly appreciated! With kindly regards Jonas Hedman signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Swedish chars in attached gpg-encrypted message fails
jonas hedman wrote: > "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >Content-Disposition: inline >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >Secret =E5=E4=F6 =C5=C4=D6" As the header shows, the =E5 characters are quoted-printable encoding. Mutt is encoding the characters because the PGP/MIME RFC (3156) says all 8-bit characters for pgp/signed message MUST be encoded. (I am guessing you are both signing and encrypting the messages.) Email clients should generally deal with this correctly, and decode the content before displaying it. If for some reason, the recipients are viewing the content outside of a MUA, they may want to use the qprint utility to decode and view the content. > 2. Why doesn't this problem show up when encrypting inline style? Inline style has no such mandate. If allow_8bit is set and you are also encrypting the message (which ascii-armors the output), then Mutt allows the 8-bit encoding. -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA http://www.8t8.us/configs/gpg-key-transition-statement.txt signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Quotes [Was: saving messages to files/permissions?]
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 08:25:39PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote: > On 19.06.15 17:11, David Champion wrote: > > Are we really going to do this? > > ISTM that you're painting it more complex than the reality. It is easier > than the above with the original simpler presentation, where each > attribution begins at the top of its own '>' column. There is then no > more effort than following a straight vertical line directly to the > author. Yes, but most people don't use SuperCite, so once some more people respond to a message, you could end up with a jumble more like: >> Humpbert> blah blah. The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog. I >> Humpbert> think that now is the time. >> >> Jane> I think something else. >> >> Some text here > > etc. etc. I haven't used it myself, but seems like there are some corner cases that I imagine would also present problems, such as when someone doesn't provide a full name, or when more than one person being quoted has the same name. Overall, I just think it's rude to use a style of quoting that's non-standard, because once you end up with nested quotes and so on, it can be a giant mess. The conventional way of quoting works fine *if* people trim and attribute correctly. In terms of how quoted material is *rendered* within a MUA, that's a different issue, and especially with format=flowed text that's properly encoded, I could see arguments for making the display view (not the editor view) use, say, solid vertical lines, as some GUI mailers do. w
Re: "reply to list" from compose menu?
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 5:01 AM, Michael Tatge wrote: > * On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 02:51PM -0400 Xu Wang (xuwang...@gmail.com) muttered: >> Often I make the mistake of pressing "r" to reply to the list when >> indeed I would like to press "L". >> I can of course edit the "to" but I would like to just >> be able to press "L" (if I understand correctly, this might also >> correctly set some headers). >> >> Is there anyway to implement such a bind? > > No, but you could use a folder- or message-hook to bind "r" to > I.e.: > > folder-hook . 'bind index,pager r reply' > folder-hook =mailinglists 'bind index,pager r list-reply' > > message-hook . 'bind index,pager r reply' > message-hook ~l 'bind index,pager r list-reply' > > message-hook of course has the disadvantage that you need to view the > message first. Thank you for pointing this out, Michael, and making sure I am aware of the disadvantage about message-hook (I really enjoy these additional intuitive explanations to newbies like me). Kind regards, Xu
Re: How to ask mutt to not check for new mail
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Erik Christiansen wrote: > On 18.06.15 20:21, Patrick Shanahan wrote: >> * Xu Wang [06-18-15 20:06]: >> > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Derek Martin >> > wrote: >> [...] >> > > Having answered the question, I am pretty curious: Why on earth would >> > > you want to do that?! >> > >> > The reason is that I have focus problems (attention deficit disorder I >> > believe is the English term). I would like to start Mutt and have Mutt >> > check for new mail *at the initial starting* and then address all of >> > the mail there, and only after that check if there is new mail. If I >> > am working on my inbox and all of a sudden a new email arrives, it >> > completely throws me out of focus. I imagine this must be difficult >> > for many to understand but that is how I am. > > As I must turn off the radio before I can properly focus, your plight is > not difficult to imagine. (Oddly, people who continuously check their > mobile phone, seem to relish being disturbed. Each to his own. :-) > >> I understand the need for "no distraction" but cannot understand what >> checking mail has to do with that unless you have some buffy pgm advising >> new mail. My setup only advises where new mail is when I change files >> (mbox) and the request to change files provides the next file which has >> "new mail". Ie: I do not disable checking mail but do not get a visible >> or interruptive announcement of new mail. But my vision my be limited as >> I *only* employe mbox and read remotely via ssh into my server box. > > Reading mail locally here, I see the name of a mailbox with new mail > spontaneously appear in the status line, at least when I'm in the index. > (Not sure about the browser.) While working in another xterm, the > apparent movement is immediately obvious visually. Subsequently hitting > '.' does, though, often throw up a longer list of mailboxes, so the > buffy display may be done only on the first positive check? > > It can be a distraction, but that is easily cured by lowering the > xterm. (I use four, two per side of a wide screen, auto-launched, and > with mutt auto-started in one of them.) > > If I really had to prevent mutt checking mail too often, then I'd just > prevent mutt checking mail too often - set timeout to a very high value, > as previously suggested. > > Erik Thank you for such a response and such comprehension of my quirkys! I shall follow the advice and use a high value. Kind regards, Xu
Re: Quotes
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 08:49:36PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote: > form. If it is the: > > "Ian> . > Herbet> ... " > > form, than that's no harder than following a straight line. I've never > heard of that being deprecated, though I've only encountered it rarely > in list posts. Actually, that can be ambiguous. For example: Ian> . Herbet> ... Ian> . Herbet> ... Is the second "Ian>" line a response to the first "Herbet>" line, or did Herbet reply to two different parts of the same message from Ian, trimming Ian's message in the normal way, and quoting only what he wanted to reply to for context? And if it was the former, was the second "Herbet>" line a response to the second "Ian>" line, or a continuation of his response to the first "Ian>" line, or something else entirely? Proper use of attributions and quoting in the more common way makes this all clear. -- This address uses a whitelist. If you aren't in my whitelist, you can only send me e-mail if you send to an appropriately tagged address (it includes +sometag between the username and @). Finger my untagged e-mail address for a tag guaranteed good for 24 hours if you're unsure. If I've sent you mail recently, you're temporarily whitelisted automatically.
more than one FCC possible?
Dear all, My goal is to get the message ID from a message I just sent. One way I am thinking of doing this is copying a message to a temporary file (via FCC) and then getting its message ID with a script. Is this possible? I would like to do this instead of setting "record" because I want to use record for other things (e.g. setting it to a non-local folder). Kind regards, Xu
