On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 19:20:38 -0500, SGT. Garcia wrote:
> that sound unnecessarily complicated. just a simple socket should do. that
> is if mutt has one opened and listening on.
mutt has a "command line", so it would be feasible to have an option to
listen on a socket for commands. I don't thi
* SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 19:24]:
> On Feb 28 17:56 -0500, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> > I haven't been a user that long, but I do have multiple instances of
> > mutt open often enough I think I'd notice problems if they exist. If you
> > do want to send commands to a specific instance, you could use tmux
* SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 19:21]:
> On Feb 28 16:49 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > * SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 16:24]:
> > > On Feb 28 12:48 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > > > * SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 11:21]:
> > > > > ...the notion exist in browsers (elinks, firefox) but i was wondering
> >
On Feb 28 17:56 -0500, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> I haven't been a user that long, but I do have multiple instances of
> mutt open often enough I think I'd notice problems if they exist. If you
> do want to send commands to a specific instance, you could use tmux
> send-keys -t 'services:mutt.0' or some
On Feb 28 16:49 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 16:24]:
> > On Feb 28 12:48 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > > * SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 11:21]:
> > > > ...the notion exist in browsers (elinks, firefox) but i was wondering if
> > > > one could send remote commands to a
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 16:49:29 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> There is no problem I am aware of running multiple instances of mutt as
> long as you have file-locking. I have been using mutt this way for > 10
> years.
I haven't been a user that long, but I do have multiple instances of
mutt op
* SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 16:24]:
> On Feb 28 12:48 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > * SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 11:21]:
> > > ...the notion exist in browsers (elinks, firefox) but i was wondering if
> > > one could send remote commands to a running instance of mutt? for example
> > > to send mailto
On Feb 28 12:48 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 11:21]:
> > ...the notion exist in browsers (elinks, firefox) but i was wondering if
> > one could send remote commands to a running instance of mutt? for example
> > to send mailto: uri action from a browser/cli/script.
>
Hello,
I've observed the following issue with mutt:
When multiple
-BEGIN PGP xyz——
-END PGP xyz——
blocks are present and (Esc P) was invoked, mutt
leaves temporary files in $TMPDIR.
Root cause seems to be pgp.c:pgp_application_pgp_handler(). If multiple
blocks are pre
* SGT. Garcia [02-28-15 11:21]:
> ...the notion exist in browsers (elinks, firefox) but i was wondering if
> one could send remote commands to a running instance of mutt? for example
> to send mailto: uri action from a browser/cli/script.
certainly, configuragle within your browser. Something li
could someone clarify the diff here please?
%S : status of the message (N/D/d/!/r/*)
%Z : message status flags
%S seems to me the maildir flags (if i'm not mistaken), i don't get what %Z
is for. in fact i can't remove 'F' when it's related to %Z which is not
even listed here:
http://www.mutt.org/
...the notion exist in browsers (elinks, firefox) but i was wondering if
one could send remote commands to a running instance of mutt? for example
to send mailto: uri action from a browser/cli/script.
12 matches
Mail list logo
