On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 09:23:40PM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon Jul 21, 2003 at 12:08:29PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> > > And you could ignore to use mutt if you don't want to mess with a MTA.
> > > BTW, ever tried to run eximconfig with option 2? You can setup a
> > > s
Hi!
On Mon Jul 21, 2003 at 12:08:29PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> > And you could ignore to use mutt if you don't want to mess with a MTA.
> > BTW, ever tried to run eximconfig with option 2? You can setup a
> > smarthost using mailserver within 9.3 seconds (if you are fast ;-).
>
> But that
Also sprach Bijan Soleymani (Mon 21 Jul 02003 at 12:08:29PM -0400):
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 07:43:31AM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> >
> > ad IMAP: A MUA has to support IMAP or IMAP would be another POP. IMAP
> > mails belongs on the server side and not on the client.
> >
> > ad POP: Do
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 07:43:31AM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> Hi!
>
> [Finally I must join this thread now.]
>
> On Sat Jul 19, 2003 at 01:05:32AM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> > This argument just doesn't make it. Mutt does filtering (shouldn't
>
> Where does mutt filter you messages
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 00:09:05 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can understand the whole personal mail not on business servers, but
> what's wrong with the other way around? I don't see anything
> ethically or legally questionable about that. If it puts you in a
> legally questiona
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> On Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 10:49:01PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Faster if you know the options by memory.
>
> That's true but memory is expensive ;-).
Its the quality, not the quantity that concerns me - latency is a tad
high (on the order of h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 12:02:31AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > You never gave any explaination at all as to why they would be an
> > issue, just made a paranoid statement that everybody flat dismissed
> > and claimed it as fact.
>
> I did give an
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 00:02:31 -0700
Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Those aren't standards yet. And the only thing I see there is an
> > awknowledgement that there are mailers currently in use that do the
> > wrong thing, not that it's the right thing to do.
> And you still haven't
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:58:57 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You never gave any explaination at all as to why they would be an
> issue, just made a paranoid statement that everybody flat dismissed
> and claimed it as fact.
I did give an explanation. Work mail must originate fr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 11:48:19PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Explain what validates said non-issues?
>
> Uhm, no. I have explained them already. The onus is on you to explain
> why they are nothing more than paranoid and not valid concerns an
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:10:36 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Explain what validates said non-issues?
Uhm, no. I have explained them already. The onus is on you to explain
why they are nothing more than paranoid and not valid concerns and problems.
> And what business does a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 08:04:25AM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> That's true but memory is expensive ;-).
Not really. Run exim as a satellite system from imap and it only
kicks in if you send mail.
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 11:02:21PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Really now? I saw some paranoid concerns, but that doesn't address
> > issues with using your own MTA.
>
> Nice to see that my valid problems are chalked up as nothing but paranoia.
Hi!
On Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 10:49:01PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > ad IMAP: A MUA has to support IMAP or IMAP would be another POP. IMAP
> > mails belongs on the server side and not on the client.
>
> Well, isn't offlineimap something like a caching personal imap server?
offlineimap is some so
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:57:15 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So the real solution would be to find a way to switch smarthosts more
> easily.
I dunno. "Accounts / Edit / SMTP server" is pretty darn easy.
> > > Again, what's wrong with using your own MTA? Nobody's provided
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 10:49:42PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Uh, if we're talking smarthost, yeah, you do. Where do you think that
> smarthost forwards mail to?
So the real solution would be to find a way to switch smarthosts more
easily.
> > A
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 07:43:31 +0200
Thomas Krennwallner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> actually sense to split software in several parts or you will end up in
> software that does everything (german speaking people would say
> eierlegende Wollmilchsau) and nothing because the software developer has
>
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:37:45 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whereas if you're running an MTA, you don't have to worry about
> whatever network you're already on having one.
Uh, if we're talking smarthost, yeah, you do. Where do you think that
smarthost forwards mail to?
> A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 07:43:31AM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> > procmail be doing this). Mutt does IMAP and POP (shouldn't fetchmail
>
> ad IMAP: A MUA has to support IMAP or IMAP would be another POP. IMAP
> mails belongs on the server side
Hi!
[Finally I must join this thread now.]
On Sat Jul 19, 2003 at 01:05:32AM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> This argument just doesn't make it. Mutt does filtering (shouldn't
Where does mutt filter you messages? With what setting?
> procmail be doing this). Mutt does IMAP and POP (shouldn't fe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 01:05:32AM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> Ok so I was very wrong about this. I think this is very useful.
>
> What I meant is that if I go on the road with my laptop, I can connect
> to a net connection there and use the smtp
Jesse Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I also find that a local MTA on a laptop is great. I have a local
> network which grabs my email from several sources and sorts it, then
> every other machine on the network can access that email via imaps.
>
> My laptop is configured to periodically che
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 06:16, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:41:24AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> > also sprach Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2335 +0200]:
> > > Er, no, the .rpm -> .deb direction is distinctly useful, not to mention
> > > required for LSB complian
On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 12:21, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:55:16AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Which brings me to a question. Hey, all you Debian Developers! Do
> > you put the fact you're a DD on your resume?
>
> Yes. It's a significant part of my free-time work and experi
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> Bijan Soleymani said on Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 02:06:18PM -0400:
> > I really don't see a valid argument for MTA/MDA/MUA on a PC-type
> > one-user workstation. Especially on a laptop. When MUAs support IMAP and
> > POP they should go the extra inch and supp
also sprach Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.17.2012 +0200]:
> > Mine does that just fine. I click on it with the left mouse button,
> > and mutt pops open
>
> So you have multiple instances of mutt going all the time? That seems
> wasteful to me.
No, just when I need them. Aside, the
Nathan E Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:26:36PM -0600, Gary Hennigan wrote:
[snip]
>> Man, I *REALLY* wanted to avoid this thread! ;) But a legitimate
>> question deserves an answer...
>>
>> Hit "1" while in top and it'll display the CPU info seperately.
>
> Er, wh
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 12:37:44 -0500
Nathan E Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Er, what version of procps? Doesn't work here; I've got 2.0.7-8 (and
> a non-i36 arch but I hope that doesn't matter).
ii procps 3.1.9-1The /proc file system utilities
Not sure when it started do
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:26:36PM -0600, Gary Hennigan wrote:
> martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [snip]
> > top - 19:32:46 up 104 days, 4:57, 1 user, load average: 0.01, 0.02,
> > 0.05
> > Tasks: 299 total, 1 running, 295 sleeping, 3 stopped, 0 zombie
> > Cpu(s): 0.2% user
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Guess what: X-forwarding over a Dual ISDN line from a host 8 hops
> away in another country isn't that much fun. That's where my
> mailserver is wrt my current position.
Not a problem, likely. Set the mailserver up to use mozilla
-remote... the only
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
> top - 19:32:46 up 104 days, 4:57, 1 user, load average: 0.01, 0.02,
> 0.05
> Tasks: 299 total, 1 running, 295 sleeping, 3 stopped, 0 zombie
> Cpu(s): 0.2% user, 2.7% system, 0.0% nice, 97.1% idle
> Mem: 2068748k total, 2043068
Bijan Soleymani said on Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 02:06:18PM -0400:
> I really don't see a valid argument for MTA/MDA/MUA on a PC-type
> one-user workstation. Especially on a laptop. When MUAs support IMAP and
> POP they should go the extra inch and support SMTP smarthosts.
I've found a local MTA on a
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:37:49 +0200
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mine does that just fine. I click on it with the left mouse button,
> and mutt pops open
So you have multiple instances of mutt going all the time? That seems
wasteful to me.
> top - 19:32:46 up 104 days, 4:57,
--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 11:44:44AM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> They have been refuted, you simply choose not to accept that. We've
> been through this already. You simply choose to interpret things
>
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 11:44:44 -0600
"Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They have been refuted, you simply choose not to accept that. We've
> been through this already. You simply choose to interpret things
> completely differently.
No, they have not. No one has refuted that havi
also sprach Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.17.1920 +0200]:
> > The UNIX philosophy says: xbuffy!
>
> Every little task does not have to be in a separate binary. Esp.
> when that binary can't really take input.
Whatever, I don't need to argue this. I love xbuffy.
> Erm, be readable for
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 10:20:19AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 18:45:38 +0200 martin f krafft wrote:
> You see what you, and others, seem to forget about the Unix philosophy is
> that at it's core are these words:
> The right tool for the job.
I don't think we've forgot that at
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 18:45:38 +0200
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The UNIX philosophy says: xbuffy!
Every little task does not have to be in a separate binary. Esp. when
that binary can't really take input.
> > > Aside, xbuffy can do it all for you if you wish.
> > Free bl
also sprach Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.17.1739 +0200]:
> Whereas my switching from Mutt to a GUI application raised mine by
> factors because I didn't have to deal with the trouble of
> configuring it to my required setup. Also you missed the point.
> Even if I weren't writing a messa
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 05:08:55PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> productivity by factors! Aside, xbuffy can do it all for you if you
> wish.
I'd never heard of the buffy/biffy/biff programs before. I've found gbuffy and
xbuffy. I'm wondering if there's an equivalent to these which will site
nice
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 17:08:55 +0200
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When I am writing a message, I am writing a message. I don't care
> how many mails are in the other mailboxes, or where one arrives, as
> I am writing a message and not surveying my mailboxes. Switching
> from a GUI cli
also sprach Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.17.1515 +0200]:
> Compare that to the display I get now. I'm typing this. I can see
> that I have another 20 new messges in debian-users, a new one came
> into debian-devel, one is sitting in b5jms (which I am letting
> sit) I have 6 in Sylpheed-
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 03:43:49 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, via caching proxy is the nearly universally encouraged
> method of web browsing. Really cuts back on the costs of running a
> website and the bandwidth used to access them.
Which does not invalidate my poin
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 03:25:13 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They're not user readable.
Hmmm, they're readable to the user who needs to read them.
> Procmail to filter each address off, mutt send-hooks to check the
> address it was sent to and reply with that address. Talking
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 03:25:13AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Procmail to filter each address off, mutt send-hooks to check the
> address it was sent to and reply with that address. Talking five
> minutes with google.
What about Bcc: ?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:23:50PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Exactly. That's my point. You don't use a "Web User Agent" which has to
> access the remote sites through a "Web Transport Agent", do you? You *can*,
> it's called a proxy server but
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:41:24AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2335 +0200]:
> > Er, no, the .rpm -> .deb direction is distinctly useful, not to mention
> > required for LSB compliance ...
>
> ... which Debian has achieved since when?
We
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:35:08AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Also, cron is a required component of the system, which depends on an MTA.
> > How else is it going to give users output? Osmosis? Telepathy?
>
> Log files?
They're not user reada
also sprach Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.17.1048 +0200]:
> It's 2003 and people still don't know what the -C and -X flags do
> in SSH?
Guess what: X-forwarding over a Dual ISDN line from a host 8 hops
away in another country isn't that much fun. That's where my
mailserver is wrt my cu
also sprach Chris Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.17.0219 +0200]:
> *normally* listening to port 25 . . .are you saying that when fetchmail
> is explicitly configured to invoke an MDA in /etc/fetchmailrc, that
> MDA is briefly listening on port 25 until it's done receiving from
> fetchmail, an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:24:00PM -0400, nori heikkinen wrote:
> oh, i see what you mean. but that will only work locally, right?
> right now i read my email off xterms from one machine, while using a
> browser local to another.
>
> guess i'm SOL?
--gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:44:53PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:35:11PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:19:27PM -0400, Chris Metzler wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:48:20 -0400
> "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > If fetchmail was able to pass the mail
> > to it, then that means it was listening on port 25 (and pretending to
> > handle incoming mail)
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:19:27PM -0400, Chris Metzler wrote:
| On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:48:20 -0400
| "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >
| > If fetchmail was able to pass the mail
| > to it, then that means it was listening on port 25 (and pretending to
| > handle incoming mail)
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:35:11PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:31:10PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
>
> > Two packages (that I know of) in Debian do just this:
> > - offlineimap
> > - isync
>
> I am aware of both of those, but for many usages they are not very
> e
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:03:12AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
>
> > I nominate offlineimap for the Tool of the Year 2003 Award!
>
> Offlineimpa had severe problems with defunct threads last I saw, and yes
> I filed a bug report on it. Sadly, it
--YZ5djTAD1cGYuMQK
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:31:10PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:07:53PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:26:15PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:57:40 -0600 "Jamin W. Collins" wrote:
>
> Please also read the RFC and note that it does make the distinction
> between client and server. The protocol is written so that behaviors
> that must be followed are but
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:07:53PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:48:18PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> > Apples and oranges, but ideally an MUA doesn't need POP or IMAP support
> > no.
>
> Implementing IMAP support outside the client is almost insane. IMAP
> leaves
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:48:18PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> Apples and oranges, but ideally an MUA doesn't need POP or IMAP support
> no.
Implementing IMAP support outside the client is almost insane. IMAP
leaves the mail on the server most of the time, and downloads the
messages as they a
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:19:27PM -0400, Chris Metzler wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:48:20 -0400
> "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > If fetchmail was able to pass the mail
> > to it, then that means it was listening on port 25 (and pretending to
> > handle incoming mail)
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:48:18 -0600
"Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And none of that requires the MUA to support SMTP. Take a look at
> nullmailer, seems like a good fit for your above description.
Quite the contrary, you, and others, have failed to explain why mail is
the only
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:57:40 -0600
"Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You seem to miss the point of the 4yz error code.
No, I haven't.
> The fact that an automated retry can (and should) be done. What you propose
> would remove this and instead require human interaction for a tr
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:13:37PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Some key words. First 4xx is an error condition. Second, it is
> temporary. Third, the action *MAY* be requested again. Not must.
> There is absolutely no compelling reason for the client to absolutely
> retry without human interven
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 07:56:48PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:08:04PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
>
> > And leave out key parts of the protocol, no. Implement the entire
> > protocol or don't do it. And as far as I'm concerned an MUA
> > shouldn't speak SMTP at
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:48:20 -0400
"Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If fetchmail was able to pass the mail
> to it, then that means it was listening on port 25 (and pretending to
> handle incoming mail)
Can you clarify what you mean by this? I have fetchmail pass mail
to exi
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 17:08:04 -0600
"Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> WRONG! Completely and utterly wrong. The error codes have specific
> meanings and those meanings should be followed. Anything less is an
> incomplete implementation.
Really? Reading 2821 one sees that it boi
--O5XBE6gyVG5Rl6Rj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:08:04PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> > Now, I know I have oversimplified the process. I also know that there
> > are a lot of steps
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 12:19:40PM -0400, MJM wrote:
> Go around your arse to scratch your elbow method: build an RPM and use alien
> to make a .deb from the .rpm.
Actually, that sounds like the "go through your arse to scratch your
forehead metho
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:23:50PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Processing boils down to this:
> You lose connection, error condition.
> You get a 5xx error, error condition.
> You get a 4xx error, error condition.
>
> In all cases fail the message, set it aside and wait for the user to
> decide.
also sprach Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2335 +0200]:
> Er, no, the .rpm -> .deb direction is distinctly useful, not to mention
> required for LSB compliance ...
... which Debian has achieved since when?
In fact, let me rephrase: are we ever going to be LSB-compliant?
--
Please
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:45:40 -0400
"Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As Martin points out, the "Process" step you listed is a concise way
> of describing the job of an MTA. The details of "Process" are defined
> in RFC 821, superseded by RFC 2821.
The details of "process" i
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:06:15PM -0400, MJM wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2003 13:44, martin f krafft wrote:
> > also sprach MJM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1819 +0200]:
> > > Go around your arse to scratch your elbow method: build an RPM
> > > and use alien to make a .deb from the .rpm.
> >
also sprach MJM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2306 +0200]:
> I wasn't serious, but after skimming the package maintainers guide
> to see what the right way is I can see why alien would not be
> liked. Why on earth did the people deciding what packages to
> include allow the alien package to be r
also sprach nori heikkinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2224 +0200]:
> oh, i see what you mean. but that will only work locally, right?
> right now i read my email off xterms from one machine, while using a
> browser local to another.
from url_handlers.sh:
# Any entry in the lists of programs
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 13:44, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach MJM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1819 +0200]:
> > Go around your arse to scratch your elbow method: build an RPM
> > and use alien to make a .deb from the .rpm.
>
> NO! do it right!
I wasn't serious, but after skimming the p
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:42:49AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
| On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 01:14:52 -0700
| Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:01:47AM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
| > > And kmail has one major advantage: I can read mails
| > > with over-long lines withou
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:00:57PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
| I remember having fetchmail deliver my mail to /dev/null after having
| misconfigured my MTA. I installed one of those "Sending Only" MTAs to
| use with mutt, and didn't realize that meant that fetchmail would pass
| it the mail an
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:35:08AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
| On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:14:42 -0700
| Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > Because it's pointless and un-necissary to impliment the better part
| > of an MTA into an MUA.
|
| Which is why you don't do that. Smarthost doesn't need
* nori heikkinen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030716 13:24]:
> on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:56:36PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
> > also sprach nori heikkinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2110 +0200]:
> > > > > http://jobsearch.monster.com/getjob.asp?JobID=18496386&AVSDM=2003%2D07%2D16+00%3A13%3A00&CCD
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:24:00PM -0400, nori heikkinen wrote:
> on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:56:36PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
>
> > then hit ctrl-b in the index or while viewing the message.
>
> oh, i see what you mean. but that will only work locally, right?
> right now i read my email of
on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:56:36PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
> also sprach nori heikkinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2110 +0200]:
> > > > http://jobsearch.monster.com/getjob.asp?JobID=18496386&AVSDM=2003%2D07%2D16+00%3A13%3A00&CCD=my%2Emonster%2Ecom&JSD=jobsearch%2Emonster%2Ecom&HD=compan
also sprach Derrick 'dman' Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2057 +0200]:
> | So I would have to set up more than one user account to access more
> | than one smtp host. I have one ISP and many various POP accounts
>
> POP != SMTP. I suspect that KMail can retrieve from multiple POP
> acco
also sprach nori heikkinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.2110 +0200]:
> > > http://jobsearch.monster.com/getjob.asp?JobID=18496386&AVSDM=2003%2D07%2D16+00%3A13%3A00&CCD=my%2Emonster%2Ecom&JSD=jobsearch%2Emonster%2Ecom&HD=company%2Emonster%2Ecom&AD=http%3A%2F%2Fjobsearch%2Emonster%2Ecom%2Fjobsearc
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:10:50PM -0400, nori heikkinen wrote:
> on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 02:40:06PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
> > also sprach Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1042 +0200]:
> > > http://jobsearch.monster.com/getjob.asp?JobID=18496386&AVSDM=2003%2D07%2D16+00%3A13%3A00&
on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 02:40:06PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
> also sprach Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1042 +0200]:
> > http://jobsearch.monster.com/getjob.asp?JobID=18496386&AVSDM=2003%2D07%2D16+00%3A13%3A00&CCD=my%2Emonster%2Ecom&JSD=jobsearch%2Emonster%2Ecom&HD=company%2Emons
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 12:14:34PM -0400, MJM wrote:
| I checked KMail for the possibility of accessing more than one smtp host - my
| version (standard Debian stable package of KDE) seems to support only one
| host.
This is normal. In practice you don't really need to send mail out
through mo
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:14:52AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:01:47AM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
> > And kmail has one major advantage: I can read mails
> > with over-long lines without problems...
>
> So can mutt, but the ultimate solution is to tell your correspon
also sprach Emma Jane Hogbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1827 +0200]:
> If you are thinking about replacements for KDE and Gnome you may want to
> check out: Fluxbox and/or Blackbox (fluxbox is based on blackbox).
> http://fluxbox.sf.net
> http://blackboxwm.sourceforge.net/
or: Win
also sprach MJM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1819 +0200]:
> Go around your arse to scratch your elbow method: build an RPM
> and use alien to make a .deb from the .rpm.
NO! do it right!
--
Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them!
.''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTEC
--sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:19:02PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1756 +0200]:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 a
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:55:16AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Which brings me to a question. Hey, all you Debian Developers! Do
> you put the fact you're a DD on your resume?
Yes. It's a significant part of my free-time work and experience, so it
deserves to be there. I suspect it may have bee
also sprach Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1756 +0200]:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 02:40:50PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> > fetchmail requires you to have an MDA configured, which may well be
> > beyond the average user.
>
> Wait, since when? I ran fetchmail *long* before I ran p
also sprach Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.07.16.1755 +0200]:
> Yeah, I'd love it if there was something more in the form of a concise
> HOWTO. If there is one, I haven't found it but would love to be
> proven wrong. God knows I would package everything I compile on my
> own and throw up
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 12:14:34PM -0400, MJM wrote:
> application. More PITA. So my thinking is that KDE, Gnome, and others like
> them are too much stuff too tightly integrated with too many test cases for
> even the OS community. I want to return to 1993 and reclaim some reliability
> and c
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 11:55, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:41:56PM +0100, Richard Kimber wrote:
> > I don't use the Debian packages. I download the src and just compile it.
> > It always compiles for me without problem. No doubt I would make my own
> > debs if I knew how, bu
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:41:56 +0100
Richard Kimber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't use the Debian packages. I download the src and just compile it.
> It always compiles for me without problem. No doubt I would make my own
> debs if I knew how, but I've always found the documentation on this
>
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 00:33, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> | I use KMail - is it being lame?
>
> Yes. Or, possibly, it has a list reply feature that you haven't found
> yet. I can't say for certain because I don't use it.
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 03:19, Joerg Johannes wrote:
> I use kmai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 02:40:50PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> fetchmail requires you to have an MDA configured, which may well be
> beyond the average user.
Wait, since when? I ran fetchmail *long* before I ran procmail...
- --
.''`. Paul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:41:56PM +0100, Richard Kimber wrote:
> I don't use the Debian packages. I download the src and just compile it.
> It always compiles for me without problem. No doubt I would make my own
> debs if I knew how, but I've always
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
