Have mutt return a success message if ispell returns a 0. Or something
like that. Currently if ispell runs over a message and finds no errors,
there is no way of knowing that ispell ran at all.
--
Scott
hi
Ship's Log, Lt. David Thorburn-Gundlach, Stardate 190199.0948:
> Andy --
>
> Welcome to the Great Mutt PGP Debate, wherein the religious philosophy
> of adhering to the proper RFC standards versus doing it the way it's
> always been.
>
btw. was mutt written according to RFC 2015 or vv? ;-)
SteelOnIce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm... all I want to do is send a plain text
> message, which contains the pgp message NO
> ATACHMENTS...
In your .muttrc:
# For generating old-style clearsigned PGP unMIMEd attachments:
macro compose f1 "Fpgp +verbose=0 -fast +clearsig=
Hi!
Why the mutt-users-digest mailing list is in plain
text, not in mime digest?
Mutt works very fine with mime digest messages. It is
easily to reply to a single message of the digest if
it is in mime.
TIA.
--
___
Daniel González Gasull __|_|__
Hi!
How can I see message/external-body attachments with
Mutt?
Must I use procmail for this?
TIA.
--
___
Daniel González Gasull __|_|__"Un sólo muerto es
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (o o) ya demasiado."
PGP RSA key 1024/EEA93A69 ( -
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 01:51:00PM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
> If I intented to be snotty to people about it, I would certainly do that.
> Since I don't intend to be snotty to people about it, I feel that those who
> are riding their high horses should back up their actions.
You understand. This is
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 10:33:54PM +0100, Stefan `Sec` Zehl wrote:
> > It still doesn't make sense. If the current list is "person1, person2" and
> > I hit "c" and type "person3", why should the truncated list contain only
> > "person1" ?
>
> Oh. I truely didn't read carefully enough :-)
>
> >
> > What I'm getting at is that while Mutt may be doing it right, you can get
> > down off your high horse and help out the people who have to be able to
> > work in a backwards compatible fashion. The current PGP-Notes documentation
> > scratches the surface at best. I figured it out - as I'm su
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 11:48:19AM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
> It still doesn't make sense. If the current list is "person1, person2" and
> I hit "c" and type "person3", why should the truncated list contain only
> "person1" ?
Oh. I truely didn't read carefully enough :-)
> If it contained only "p
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 11:56:25AM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
> What I'm getting at is that while Mutt may be doing it right, you can get
> down off your high horse and help out the people who have to be able to
> work in a backwards compatible fashion. The current PGP-Notes documentation
> scratches
> Welcome to the Great Mutt PGP Debate, wherein the religious philosophy
> of adhering to the proper RFC standards versus doing it the way it's
> always been.
> In short, PGP signatures and encrypted text really should, according
> to RFC 2015 (IIRC), be attachments. In even shorter, mutt folk
> > If you type ", [EMAIL PROTECTED]" it works fine. But if you simple type
> > another e-mail address, like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", the Cc: list is
> > truncated to simply:
> >
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > .. I can't imagine that this is an intended effect.
>
> You are wrong, this is indeed
Hi again...
I now also upgraded my pgp version and it doesn't really seem to work with mutt
anymore...
I set "set pgp_default_version=pgp5" in my muttrc but I still can't read signatures...
all it says is:
[-- PGP output follows (current time: Tue Jan 19 18:06:03 1999) --]
sh: v: command not fo
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 06:08:47PM +, SteelOnIce wrote:
> Hi again...
>
> I now also upgraded my pgp version and it doesn't really seem to work with mutt
>anymore...
> I set "set pgp_default_version=pgp5" in my muttrc but I still can't read
>signatures...
>
> all it says is:
> [-- PGP outp
Thanks,
I didn't know about the RFC 2015 (IIRC).
But at least I do know now that I am doing right, what (allmost) everybody else
is doing wrong :)))
Andy
On Tue, Jan 19, David Thorburn-Gundlach wrote:
> Andy --
>
> Welcome to the Great Mutt PGP Debate, wherein the religious philosophy
> of ad
Hi
I hope I did not misobserve this.
When I have collased threads (like in esc-V) and I press 'd' it chooses one
mail with an arbetrary algorithem and delets it (ok, the alg. is 'take the 1st
mail' ;)
Wouldn't it be more logical that 'd' will delete the whole thread?
just binding 'd' to delete_th
Hi!
On Mon, Jan 18, 1999 at 03:56:45PM +0100, Gero Treuner wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 1999 at 01:35:53PM +0100, Markus Hofmann wrote:
> > Quoting Heikki Kantola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > According to Markus Hofmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > i'm trying to read mails from a M$-Exchange Server wit
Andy --
Welcome to the Great Mutt PGP Debate, wherein the religious philosophy
of adhering to the proper RFC standards versus doing it the way it's
always been.
In short, PGP signatures and encrypted text really should, according
to RFC 2015 (IIRC), be attachments. In even shorter, mutt folks s
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 09:12:40 -0500, David Thorburn-Gundlach wrote:
> Hi, folks --
>
> I know, thanks to a post to the list a while ago, about '$' to write
> all changes to the mailbox without requiring an exit. I also know
> that I can abandon all changes by exiting instead of quitting.
>
>
Salvo --
Did you go through and make sure you get all of your commands changed
over? That looks like it might be a flag...
:-D
--
David Thorburn-Gundlach * It's easier to fight for one's principles
(play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAI
Hi, folks --
I know, thanks to a post to the list a while ago, about '$' to write
all changes to the mailbox without requiring an exit. I also know
that I can abandon all changes by exiting instead of quitting.
Is there any way I can abandon, or undo, all changes a la 'x' but NOT
have to exit m
On Mon, Jan 18, 1999 at 09:00:53PM -0800, Joe Rhett wrote:
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] _<-cursor here
>
> If you type ", [EMAIL PROTECTED]" it works fine. But if you simple type
> another e-mail address, like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", the Cc: list is
> truncated to simply:
>
> Cc: [EMA
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 00:46:04 +, Adam M. Costello wrote:
> Byrial Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Here is my understanding of when mail checking is done:
> >
> > At every key press and after a keyboard timeout (see the "timeout"
> > variable) Mutt checks if it should check for new
On Mon, Jan 18, 1999 at 10:15:34PM +0100, Daniel González Gasull wrote:
> How to correctly display text/x-vcard attachments?
I wrote a little autoview filter for viewing the main details of a vcard
(see my .sig). However, be warned, it is very simple and I wrote it without
looking at the v-card
> export JOETERM=linux; mutt
In rxvt, it fixes the problem with the wrecked menus, but joe behaves
strange anyway. Like typing in a row above the cursor. But it works great
with xterm. So thank you very much.
Do you know if there is any good documentation (besides mutt) that covers
the topic Ter
I realize this is a user input failure, but the result is somewhat obtuse.
Let's say that you want to add a CC recipient to a list. You hit "C", and
it opens the list:
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] _<-cursor here
If you type ", [EMAIL PROTECTED]" it works fine. But if you simple typ
26 matches
Mail list logo
