On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 16:27 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote:
> OK, I've been trying to hit this on the head once and for all. Even
> though this is getting OT, I'd like some help :)
>
> So, signature *scripts* must output in html. So I'm doing something
> simple in perl:
[snip]
> 5 print "
> 6 --
OK, I've been trying to hit this on the head once and for all. Even
though this is getting OT, I'd like some help :)
So, signature *scripts* must output in html. So I'm doing something
simple in perl:
--
1 #!/usr/bin/perl -w
2
3 use strict;
4
5 print "
6 --
7 Iain Buchanan
On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 21:30 +0100, guenther wrote:
> Please, feel free to file a bug report. :)
done, and done. http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=322090
> > They need to be html so that no matter what format the user chooses in
> > the *HTML* editor, they will be formatted correctly.
> >
> >
> They need to be html so that no matter what format the user chooses in
> the *HTML* editor, they will be formatted correctly.
>
> :)
Jeff, I was about to post the same -- when I realized, this does work
for static signatures. Yes, using the very same *HTML* editor. ;-)
My static signature wit
They need to be html so that no matter what format the user chooses in
the *HTML* editor, they will be formatted correctly.
:)
Jeff
On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 20:42 +0100, guenther wrote:
> > > Evolution expects the generated signature to be html.
> >
> > I found that out too, to my chagrin.
> >
>
> > Evolution expects the generated signature to be html.
>
> I found that out too, to my chagrin.
>
> *Why* do they have to be HTML files?
You just blew my mind.
Actually, this is a very good question. My static signature is
text/plain, too. So why is this different for signature scripts?
Pl
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 09:48 +0100, Christian Borup wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 15:15 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 23:16 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 14:00 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote:
> >
> > > > Or do I need one copy of the script for each mail
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 15:15 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 23:16 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 14:00 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote:
>
> > > Or do I need one copy of the script for each mail account?
>
> > What if when you specify the script name, you add a
On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 23:16 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 14:00 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote:
> > Or do I need one copy of the script for each mail account?
> What if when you specify the script name, you add a parameter?
Hmm, good idea, but "add script" seems to ignore newline
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 14:00 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a signature script that writes to a fifo ~/.signature which
> evolution uses for the signature file.
>
> However, I wanted to use a similar script (one only) for all my mail
> accounts. Instead of having multiple copies of
Hi,
I have a signature script that writes to a fifo ~/.signature which
evolution uses for the signature file.
However, I wanted to use a similar script (one only) for all my mail
accounts. Instead of having multiple copies of the script, and fifo, I
thought I'd make one, and get rid of the fifo.
11 matches
Mail list logo