> > If the above procmail filter doesn't work (untested) let me know
> > and I will MAKE it work. Windows users - tough luck - procmail
> > is open source - hire someone to port it...
This procmail rule has caught all the mail, never slipped even one in the
last year:
:0
* ^Sender: linux-kernel
>
> if you use an MUA that can't do filtering, well then there's something
> wrong with you
I really don't believe there is any need for this kind of attitude.
/Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> If the above procmail filter doesn't work (untested) let me know
> and I will MAKE it work. Windows users - tough luck - procmail
> is open source - hire someone to port it...
and even windows users can filter properly. netscape allows you to add
cus
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> I haven't complained about any of this on the list until now, because
> I know I'm in the minority and I don't expect most people to care
> about my problems. But it bothered me seeing the criticism Mike
> Harrold has gotten for his request. Not everyone has problems b
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:11:25AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Eli Carter]
> > Have you looked at the headers in an LK email?
> >
> > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > X-Mailing-List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ^^ Should provide that List-Id you want.
>
> You missed the point. C
[Kai Henningsen]
> > There *is* a good way to do this, and it would be really nice if
> > vger could be taught to do it: add a List-Id: header
> > (draft-chandhok-listid-04.txt RFC-to-be, implemented in lots of
> > mailing list managers already).
[Eli Carter]
> Have you looked at the headers i
"Mike A. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What is right:
>
>1) not putting the thing in the subject from the list side
>2) If an end user wants it in the subject, they can set up a mail
>filter to PUT it in the subject.
>
>:0 fwh
>* ^Sender:.*owner-linux-kernel
>| sed -e 's/^Subject: /Subject
nsider instead of using the
subject header if mailing lists put the list name in the DATE
header.
Date: [linux-kernel] Jan 12, 2000
Pretty dumb eh? And annoying. And, you cant read the date in
index mode because all you see is:
419 [linux-k Timur Tabi (3,617) Re: [LK] Re: lkm
** Reply to message from "Mike A. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on
Tue, 13 Feb 2001 03:53:13 -0500 (EST)
> >I disagree, and while I may be in the minority on this list, I am certainly
> >not in the minority across the board, given that virtually every mailing list
> >I am subscribed to DOES prepen
Some people keep telling me that the way mutt handles headers is
'broken'. I've looked at it myself and don't see anything wrong and no
one explains their accusations.
Anyone know anything about this or are they blowing hot air?
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> I've played with both pine and mutt. mutt is
>
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mike Harrold wrote:
>
> >> Those would all be your problems and I would suggest using a different account
> >> for mail then.
> >
> >Out of interest, how would that solve anything? So I use an ISP instead.
> >Then I have to download all my mail to home to read it. Talk a
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
>> >Is there a mail reader nowadays that doesn't let you do some sort of
>> >filtering?
>>
>> He uses Elm, which as far as I know is obsolete, unmaintained and
>> full of bugs and even has Y2K problems. That is the last I heard
>> anyway. Alan Cox would like
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:
> >Is there a mail reader nowadays that doesn't let you do some sort of
> >filtering?
>
> He uses Elm, which as far as I know is obsolete, unmaintained and
> full of bugs and even has Y2K problems. That is the last I heard
> anyway. Alan Cox would
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Sven Koch wrote:
>> That said, and while we're on the topic.. Does anyone have a
>> *PERFECT* recipe for procmail to REMOVE the stupid [Dummy] things
>> most GNU mailman lists and others prepend to the subject?
>
>I am using the following to sort the suse-security-list (for e
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Mike A. Harris wrote:
[cc-list trimmed]
> That said, and while we're on the topic.. Does anyone have a
> *PERFECT* recipe for procmail to REMOVE the stupid [Dummy] things
> most GNU mailman lists and others prepend to the subject?
I am using the following to sort the suse-s
charset="iso-8859-1"
>Subject: Re: lkml subject line
>
>Pine, Mutt, there might be a few more.
Sorry there... PINE *DOES* do filtering, and has for quite some
time.
Main menu ->Setup->Rules->Filt
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:
>Is there a mail reader nowadays that doesn't let you do some sort of
>filtering?
He uses Elm, which as far as I know is obsolete, unmaintained and
full of bugs and even has Y2K problems. That is the last I heard
anyway. Alan Cox would likely know
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mike Harrold wrote:
>> Those would all be your problems and I would suggest using a different account
>> for mail then.
>
>Out of interest, how would that solve anything? So I use an ISP instead.
>Then I have to download all my mail to home to read it. Talk about a
>total was
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mike Harrold wrote:
>> Use procmail, that's what it's there for (and it won't affect your mail
>> reader, as long as you're using something reasonably sensible). I filter
>> on Sender.
>
>Maybe I don't *want* the LKML messages in a seperate folder.
>Maybe I just want to ident
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mike Harrold wrote:
>> > There are advantages: distinguish personal messages from mailing list
>> > messages, and distinguish between different mailing lists. And
>> > disadvantages - maybe only one: sacrificing valuable Subject: line
>> > space.
>>
>> The advantages can all
Or you could just check Sender which is already there.
On 12 Feb 2001, Kai Henningsen wrote:
>
> Indeed. What a bad idea that would be.
>
> > If you want to pre-filter messages traveling thru linux-kernel list,
> > all you need to do is to check the content of Return-Path: header.
>
> O
Kai Henningsen wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matti Aarnio) wrote on 12.02.01 in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 11:20:40AM +, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > > Dear all (and list maintainers in particular)
> > >
> > > Wouldn't it be a good idea to prepend all lkml subj
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matti Aarnio) wrote on 12.02.01 in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 11:20:40AM +, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > Dear all (and list maintainers in particular)
> >
> > Wouldn't it be a good idea to prepend all lkml subjects with [LKML] like
> > many other l
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Mike Harrold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Guest section DW
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Guennadi
> Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mike Harrold wrote:
> > Those would all be your problems and I would suggest using a different account
> > for mail then.
>
> Out of interest, how would that solve anything? So I use an ISP instead.
> Then I have to download all my mail to home to read it. Talk about a
> tot
On 02.12 Timur Tabi wrote:
>
> In fact, I was unable to find an full-featured GUI email client for Linux, so
> I'm using Polarbar, which is an all-Java client.
>
Try balsa. It can handle several pop-imap accounts, folders and subfolders,
threading view of messages and filtering through procmai
t; To: Mike Harrold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Guest section DW
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Guennadi
> Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 03:19:08PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > There are advantages: distinguish personal messages from mailing list
> > messages, and distinguish between different mailing lists. And
> > disadvantages - maybe only one: sacrificing valuable Subje
EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Guennadi
Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: lkml subject line
> Is there a mail reader nowadays that doesn't let you do some sort of
> filtering?
>
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mike
** Reply to message from "Mohammad A. Haque" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 12 Feb
2001 13:45:42 -0500 (EST)
> Is there a mail reader nowadays that doesn't let you do some sort of
> filtering?
Yes, and most of them are for Linux. Just go to Freshmeat and browse through
the email client section.
Is there a mail reader nowadays that doesn't let you do some sort of
filtering?
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Mike Harrold wrote:
> Assuming your mail reader can do that (and no, I can't change my mail
> reader).
>
> /Mike
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>
>
> On 2001-02-12T11:56:00,
>Mike Harrold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > Maybe I don't *want* the LKML messages in a seperate folder.
> > Maybe I just want to identify them at a pinch in my inbox?
>
> You can use procmail to modify the subject line of incoming mail too.
>
> > Maybe my emp
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:56:00 -0500 (EST)
Mike Harrold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Use procmail, that's what it's there for (and it won't affect your
> > mail
> > reader, as long as you're using something reasonably sensible). I
> > filter on Sender.
>
> Maybe I don't *want* the LKML messages i
On 2001-02-12T11:56:00,
Mike Harrold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Maybe I don't *want* the LKML messages in a seperate folder.
> Maybe I just want to identify them at a pinch in my inbox?
You can use procmail to modify the subject line of incoming mail too.
> Maybe my employer doesn't allow m
>
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:25:47 -0500 (EST)
> Mike Harrold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > > The advantages can all be gained without that disadvantage by just
> > learning
> > > to filter mail on other headers instead of the subject line.
> >
> > Assuming your mai
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:25:47 -0500 (EST)
Mike Harrold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > The advantages can all be gained without that disadvantage by just
> learning
> > to filter mail on other headers instead of the subject line.
>
> Assuming your mail reader can do tha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Assuming your mail reader can do that (and no, I can't change my mail
> reader).
The MUA is the wrong place to do that. The MDA can do it. And it's far
easier to change MDA than MUA.
--
dwmw2
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > There are advantages: distinguish personal messages from mailing list
> > messages, and distinguish between different mailing lists. And
> > disadvantages - maybe only one: sacrificing valuable Subject: line
> > space.
>
> The advantages can all be gained wit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> There are advantages: distinguish personal messages from mailing list
> messages, and distinguish between different mailing lists. And
> disadvantages - maybe only one: sacrificing valuable Subject: line
> space.
The advantages can all be gained without that disadvant
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 01:33:24PM +0200, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 11:20:40AM +, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > Dear all (and list maintainers in particular)
> >
> > Wouldn't it be a good idea to prepend all lkml subjects with [LKML] like
> > many other lists do to dist
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 11:20:40AM +, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> Dear all (and list maintainers in particular)
>
> Wouldn't it be a good idea to prepend all lkml subjects with [LKML] like
> many other lists do to distinguish lkml messages from the rest.
NO!
Have you ever seen reply-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Wouldn't it be a good idea to prepend all lkml subjects with [LKML]
> like many other lists do to distinguish lkml messages from the rest.
No. There are already headers you can filter on, without adding crap to the
Subject line making it even harder to skim-read l-k t
Dear all (and list maintainers in particular)
Wouldn't it be a good idea to prepend all lkml subjects with [LKML] like
many other lists do to distinguish lkml messages from the rest.
Thanks
Guennadi
___
Dr. Guennadi V. Liakhovetski
Department of Applied Mathematics
University of Sheffield, U.K.
43 matches
Mail list logo
