On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 18:23:11 -0600, David DeSimone wrote:
> If the mailbox is only accessed from one machine, why is it on an NFS
> server?
Because my home is on an NFS server. This is the main reason. But in
fact, I want to be able to access these mailboxes from other machines
too, for insta
* On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 12:28:55AM -0600, Alex Lane wrote:
> Keeping in mind this is not a PGP mail list, I nonetheless would be
> appreciative if anyone could explain why I get a signal 11 error when
> running pgp 6.5.2. The mutt docs I've looked at distinguish pgp2 and
> pgp5; is 6.5.2 a compl
wanting to try the gnu pgp, what srpms would i need to download, being
in the us.
Current remote directory is /pub/replay/pub/redhat/SRPMS.
ncftp ...eplay/pub/redhat/SRPMS > ls g*
gnupg-0.4.0-3.src.rpm gnupg-rsa-1.0-2.src.rpm
gnupg-1.0.0-1.src.rpm gnupg-rsar
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is safer for incoming mailboxes. But for archive boxes, that are
> accessed from only one machine, it is useless. So, could the locking
> mechanism be chosen from the .muttrc?
If the mailbox is only accessed from one machine, why is it on an N
After all of that, you didn't even post what the resolution was!@!!!
/jgh
- Original Message -
From: J McKitrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 1:00 pm
Subject: Re: testing procmail
> Nevermind. Figured it out.
>
> jm
> --
> --
Can mutt handle PGP keys from PGP 6.5?
Thanks
Attila
--
--
- Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Debian 2.2 Linux / 2.2.13 / exim-
- Get my PGP key: gpg --keyserver keys.pgp.com --recv-key 0x2cc33acb -
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 11:19:45 -0600, David DeSimone wrote:
> Mutt wants to use fcntl-locking on the file. This forces NFS to use a
> non-caching mode, where all I/O is transfered directly to/from the
> server, instead of being cached on the local system. This slows things
> down, but it is al
Enable verbose logging in procmail. And remember that you need a
local lockfile for file deliveries.
This is really off-topic here.
A searchable procmail mailing list archive is at
http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/procmail/
J McKitrick writes:
> Well, i took your advice, and acco
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 05:32:50PM +, J McKitrick wrote:
:I realize this is a mutt list, not a procmail list,
:but this is just a quick question not worth subscribing to another
:list for:
:
:Here's my test .procmailrc
:
:Problem is, nothing sent from me is ending up in chat. it all goes to
I realize this is a mutt list, not a procmail list,
but this is just a quick question not worth subscribing to another
list for:
Here's my test .procmailrc
Problem is, nothing sent from me is ending up in chat. it all goes to
the default directory.
In .muttrc, i have:
mailboxes
~/mail
Nevermind. Figured it out.
jm
--
-
Jonathon McKitrick / [EMAIL PROTECTED] \
"I prefer the term Artificial Person myself."/
-
Well, i took your advice, and according to the test, this should work.
I tried the most basic possible procmail filter:
I'm trying to match subjects with 'test' in them. But every time i
send myself such a message, it disappears into oblivion.
The procmail rule sends it to 'chat', which is a mai
There is an excellent procmail FAQ. It shows you step-by-step method to test the
procmail. If it worked for me, it must be easy. I was able to set up procmail in my
personal mail account w/o any problem.
However, I'm having trouble w/ my work mail account. For some reason I can not "|" or
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 11:30:07AM -0500, J McKitrick wrote:
> I'm trying to test procmail with mutt. I'm new to mutt, and *very*
> new to procmail I used a friend's procmailrc as a template, but i
> need to know if there s a way to test it without losing mail.
Check out http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts
Jorge Godoy [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Mutt uses some patterns to verify signatures and uses them to cut out
> these and the text below it when replying a message.
>
> On my system it's looking for the standard "--". On some messages
It's "-- ". Note the space.
And as noted, Mutt doesn't c
> Lars> Convenient as they are, charsets are another feature that
> Lars> make it easier for ppl to shoot themselves (and others) in the
> Lars> foot. Now that my mutt is charset sensitive, I often find messages
> Lars> with big5, iso-2022-jp, or koi8-r, although none of the spe
Eric Boehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes, across NFS. I copied the file to a local drive and ran both
> mutts. The time was about the same (1.8 sec). Both mutts were also
> run from a local drive.
Mutt wants to use fcntl-locking on the file. This forces NFS to use a
non-caching mode, whe
I got started with this...and it helped out very much
http://www.ii.com/internet/robots/procmail/qs/
/jgh
- Original Message -
From: Jag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 11:12 am
Subject: Re: testing procmail
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, J McKitrick wrote:
>
> > I'm trying
On 2000-03-15 09:36:26 -0500, Eric Boehm wrote:
> It sounds like you are saying that I should change the
> combination of
>
> +USE_DOTLOCK +USE_FCNTL -USE_FLOCK
>
> to something else but it isn't clear to me what I
> should change it to.
You really want to compile your mutt 1.0 with an extern
On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, J McKitrick wrote:
> I'm trying to test procmail with mutt. I'm new to mutt, and *very*
> new to procmail I used a friend's procmailrc as a template, but i
> need to know if there s a way to test it without losing mail.
Check out 'man procmailex' It's nothing but example
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 04:11:09PM +0100, Terje Elde wrote:
> ... but is there any way I can manage to set mutt up to check the
> domain I'm sending to, and set the correct sig?
I have one signature file for "internal" e-mail and another for
"external" e-mail. Here's what I put in my muttr
I'm trying to test procmail with mutt. I'm new to mutt, and *very*
new to procmail I used a friend's procmailrc as a template, but i
need to know if there s a way to test it without losing mail.
jm
--
-
Jonathon McKitrick / [EMAIL PROTECTED] \
"I p
At 3:57 AM EST on March 15 Daniel Gerber sent off:
> This might just be an old one...
It sure is!
> I tried to set mutt (1.0.1/1.1.8/1.1.9) up for random signatures but it
> didn't work. Following the manual I made a '.sigfixed' file in $HOME and a
> directory '.Sig' with the alternating pa
Hi all,
Being a employee of a Norwegian company I'm forced to have three different
signature files. One for my personal mail, one when I'm writing company
mail to a Norwegian email address, and one for all other business related
emails.
Hunting out business related email is easy at the start, bu
> "Thomas" == Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Lars" == Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thomas> You are transferring almost 8 MBit/s with the new mutt versions.
Thomas> This looks like the bottleneck is really NFS and your Ethernet,
Thomas> not mutt. Wi
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 08:22:47AM -0300, Jorge Godoy wrote:
> Mutt uses some patterns to verify signatures and uses them to cut
> out these and the text below it when replying a message.
>
> On my system it's looking for the standard "--". On some messages
> there are text below the signature o
Hi
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 02:05:05PM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> > How can i read this message? 'charset-hook windows-1251 cp1251' doesn't help.
>
[skipped]
>
> I hope it wasn't confidential!
yes, i have read it before using some external tools.
> This message is in koi8-r. Presumably t
Denis Chapligin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> How can i read this message? 'charset-hook windows-1251 cp1251' doesn't help.
The text/plain part contains this line:
äÏÂÒÙÊ ÄÅÎØ! ïïï áÌ×ÉÓ, login: alvis, ÐÒÏÓÉÔ ÐÒÅÄÏÓÔÁ×ÉÔØ ÄÏÍÅÎÎÏÅ ÉÍÑ
www.alvis.kaliningrad.ru ðÒÏÛÕ ÐÏÄÔ×ÅÒÄÉÔØ. áÌÌÁ çÅÄÉÍÁ.
I hope
Hi
How can i read this message? 'charset-hook windows-1251 cp1251' doesn't help.
From: "=?windows-1251?B?wOvr4CDD5eTo7OA=?=" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: request
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 11:43:24 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=
Benjamin Korvemaker wrote:
> Is there a way to list the number of messages that are in a folder when
> listing the folders? (Checking the format strings in the manual doesn't
> seem to indicate so, but I may have overlooked the right place.) Even an
> indicator of which folders have old messages
Hi!
Mutt uses some patterns to verify signatures and uses them to cut out
these and the text below it when replying a message.
On my system it's looking for the standard "--". On some messages
there are text below the signature of the people who wrote the message
that must be replied and when I
> I have found that mutt 1.1.9 is about 4x slower reading a 7.4 MB mail
> file with 1451 messages in it than mutt 1.0.
>
> I tried this several times to eliminate the effects of caching. It took mutt
> 1.0 about 7.8 seconds to bring up the file, it took mutt 1.1.9 about 28.8
> seconds to bring u
On 2000-03-15 08:17:42 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Over the past few months I've seen the odd message on
> the list concerning the use of certifcates with Mutt.
> I also remember someone posting about the use of
> OpenSSL and potentially calling this from within Mutt.
> I was wondering whet
Mikko Hänninen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Marc van Dongen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 14 Mar 2000:
: > Is there any way to tell mutt to inform me if new
: > mail has arrived? At the moment I am using xbiff
: > for that purpose but I would like to get rid of it.
:
: Sure. List your incom
On 2000-03-14 15:51:08 -0500, Scott Schwartz wrote:
> In my experience mh works well enough, but mutt makes
> some incorrect assumptions that have painful
> consequences.
Please look at the unstable branch (i.e., the
just-released 1.1.9). It should behave much better.
However, you may wish to
On 2000-03-14 21:23:36 -0500, Eric Boehm wrote:
>> I have found that mutt 1.1.9 is about 4x slower
>> reading a 7.4 MB mail file with 1451 messages in it
>> than mutt 1.0.
You are transferring almost 8 MBit/s with the new mutt
versions. This looks like the bottleneck is really NFS
and your Ethe
On 2000-03-14 15:53:27 -0500, Eric Boehm wrote:
> I am assuming the reason for the change was consistency.
Precisely. You reply to or forward what you are seeing.
--
http://www.guug.de/~roessler/
This might just be an old one...
I tried to set mutt (1.0.1/1.1.8/1.1.9) up for random signatures but it didn't work.
Following the manual I made a '.sigfixed' file in $HOME and a directory '.Sig' with
the alternating parts. I had to manually insert the line '#define ENABLE_RANDOM_SIG'
in conf
38 matches
Mail list logo
