I have FreeBSD and redhat 7.2 running on my athalon machine. On the
redhat os I am using sendmail configured using the install-sendmail 5.5
script from freshmeat and on the FreeBSD os I have sendmail installed,
but configured just as it came out of the box. Sending mail to myself
@yahoo.com works
On 16:00 27 Jan 2002, Thomas Hurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| * Cameron Simpson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
| > On 09:43 26 Jan 2002, Prahlad Vaidyanathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > > On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 Mathias Gygax spewed into the ether: Holy crap
| > > !! How do you cope ? I can't even m
Hi,
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 Roman Neuhauser spewed into the ether:
[-- snip --]
> I'm slowly getting the picture of the classes that would make this
> happen, and would like to ask you: is there something that you sorely
> lack in your favorite MDA? What is it?
>
> Any feedback is much appreciated.
Thanks, that fixed the problem.
Ben
--
Ben Logan: ben at wblogan dot net
OpenPGP Key KeyID: A1ADD1F0
The part of the world that people find most puzzling is the part called "Me".
* David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> ...and then Thomas Hurst said...
> > Gzip your message body and you'll probably find half of mutt-users
> > have it decompressed and viewed automatically :)
> > That would make tools like grep pretty useless.
>
> Well, zgrep takes care of that, too, but i
Thomas Dickey wrote:
[this is getting OT, so it might be nicest to continue this discussion
off list if necessary]
> I had in mind (having forgotten that FreeBSD has a not-invented-here
> mentality) that they'd implemented a copy of the GNU 'ls', and didn't
> consider that they may have fixed one
Ken --
...and then Ken Weingold said...
%
% On Sun, Jan 27, 2002, Sven Guckes wrote:
% > > I moved my mail to a friend's server which has some really old
...
% > check the locking method of mutt and your machine.
% >
% > Sven [using mutt-1.3.27 - opening mutt folder
% > with 39,000+ messges in
Thomas --
...and then Thomas Hurst said...
%
% * David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
%
% > Off-topic meandering:
% > I think it would be lovely to automatically compress all email before
% > sending and have it opened on the other end,
%
% Gzip your message body and you'll probably find half
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 02:50:16PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
> Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 02:24:22PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
>
> > > i usually use xterm-color in FreeBSD even though you really shouldn't
> > > ever use 'xterm-color' since color 'ls' only works (AFAIK) whe
Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 02:24:22PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
> > i usually use xterm-color in FreeBSD even though you really shouldn't
> > ever use 'xterm-color' since color 'ls' only works (AFAIK) when $TERM is
> > set to this. on linux, i use xterm-xfree86, or sometimes
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 02:24:22PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
> i usually use xterm-color in FreeBSD even though you really shouldn't
> ever use 'xterm-color' since color 'ls' only works (AFAIK) when $TERM is
> set to this. on linux, i use xterm-xfree86, or sometimes just xterm.
xterm-color is al
Dale Morris wrote:
[might be a good idea to use a subject line]
> I've just recently installed FreeBSD. I've got most all of my mail
> functioning properly, but I'm having a problem with mutt. When I am in
> a console, the bottom messages don't appear. For example I enter "q"
> and at the bottom
Hi Nick,
the $p_o_c patch sets the header
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="msg.pgp"
which is why Outlook shows an attachment. There is a patch from Dale
Woolridge, which is supposed to take care of this, but I couldn't test
it yet. (So little time.) The URL is
http:/
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 02:08:08PM -0800, Dale Morris wrote:
> I've just recently installed FreeBSD. I've got most all of my mail
> functioning properly, but I'm having a problem with mutt. When I am in a
> console, the bottom messages don't appear. For example I enter "q" and
> at the bottom of t
I've just recently installed FreeBSD. I've got most all of my mail
functioning properly, but I'm having a problem with mutt. When I am in a
console, the bottom messages don't appear. For example I enter "q" and
at the bottom of the screen is a black spaced indent and then the
cursor. No text. If I
... I forgot to say that this method also kills (as they deserve, IMHO)
even all messages from those people who just hit reply to say whatever
unrelated thing passes through their mind when they should really make
everybody's life easier by starting a new thread with a proper new
subject.
YMMV
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all
I just spoke to an Lookout! user who says she's getting my emails as
both normally and as an attachment at the same time. This is most
strange and confusing.
I have the outlook compat patch and as you can see I use $p_c_t so
everyone can under
While discussing the real reasons to fight HTML email, people said:
>> Off-topic meandering:
>> I think it would be lovely to automatically compress all email before
>> sending and have it opened on the other end,
>
>Gzip your message body and you'll probably find half of mutt-users have
>it dec
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002, Sven Guckes wrote:
> > I moved my mail to a friend's server which has some really old
> > hardware, and it takes a long time to open this mailbox, plus
> > a few times it has simply stopped while opening it and
> > I had to kill off the mutt process and open it again.
>
> ch
At Sat, Jan 26 2002 [22:34 -0500], Ben Logan aroused my curiosity with:
Hello Ben :-)
> set pgp_sign_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor
>--textmode --clearsign %?a?-u %a? %f"
pgp_sign_command is set to create old-style pgp signatures - for this
reason the va
* Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020127 15:55]:
> I have one mailbox that has A LOT of messages in it, as in
> quite a few thousand. It is in mbox format. For mutt to open
> it as quickly as possible, it is dependent on processor speed?
no. mutt works independently of procesor speed.
actua
* JASH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020127 17:46]:
> Is it possible to kill the last oldest messages in Maildir
> automaticly, for example if mails past 1000 already?
yes. but mutt won't do this unless you start it yourself.
besides of this - mutt is not the tool for this.
hint: maildir format + cron
Hello Mutt folks,
Is it possible to kill the last oldest messages in Maildir
automaticly, for example if mails past 1000 already?
--
Joerg Hoehne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Alas! Joel Hammer spake thus:
> I thought NT stands for New Technology. MS is always trying to make
> their customers forget about the last operating system.
I always thought it was "Ne Twerking" because NT is supposed to be so
secure for networks or something ;)
--
Rob 'Feztaa' Park
[EMAIL PRO
* Alexander Skwar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
So sprach »Ricardo SIGNES« am 2002-01-27 um 11:02:07 -0500 :
> > that Maildir is faster.
>
> Well, saying it so broad as you did, the only answer to this is,
> that your statement is wrong. On certain filesystems Maildir may be
> a little faster than
So sprach »Ricardo SIGNES« am 2002-01-27 um 11:02:07 -0500 :
> I'd suggest using Maildir instead of mbox -- my experience has been that
> Maildir is faster. There's much less to worry about in parsing a Maildir
Well, saying it so broad as you did, the only answer to this is, that
your statement
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002, Benjamin Smith wrote:
> CPU does become important if you're using threading as mutt needs to
> trawl through the mailbox trying to match up threads. This is further
> slowed is $strict_threads are unset as it needs to play with
> $reply_regexp on every message.
In my case i
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 11:30:04AM -0500, Derek D. Martin wrote:
> At some point hitherto, Ricardo SIGNES hath spake thusly:
> > It's dependent on a lot of things: hard drive speed, processor speed,
> > and memory. IE: all those hardware issues.
>
> Much more drive speed and memory than cpu th
At some point hitherto, Ricardo SIGNES hath spake thusly:
> It's dependent on a lot of things: hard drive speed, processor speed,
> and memory. IE: all those hardware issues.
Much more drive speed and memory than cpu though, most likely in that
order unless your mailboxes are HUGE and the amou
* David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Off-topic meandering:
> I think it would be lovely to automatically compress all email before
> sending and have it opened on the other end,
Gzip your message body and you'll probably find half of mutt-users have
it decompressed and viewed automatically :
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 07:49:54AM -0800, Ken Weingold wrote:
> I have one mailbox that has A LOT of messages in it, as in quite a few
> thousand. It is in mbox format. For mutt to open it as quickly as
> possible, it is dependent on processor speed? I moved my mail to a
It's dependent on a lo
* Cameron Simpson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 09:43 26 Jan 2002, Prahlad Vaidyanathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 Mathias Gygax spewed into the ether: Holy crap
> > !! How do you cope ? I can't even manage the 200-250 mails I get
> > everyday :-)
>
> Much as I do I gue
I have one mailbox that has A LOT of messages in it, as in quite a few
thousand. It is in mbox format. For mutt to open it as quickly as
possible, it is dependent on processor speed? I moved my mail to a
friend's server which has some really old hardware, and it takes a
long time to open this m
[ Dire-Warning: this is a proof of concept script, it works for me on my
system. Other than that I can't say, except that it requires a
development version of mutt and a patch that is labelled by it's author
as "broken"... ]
I have about 50,000 messages in a couple of dozen nfs mounted Maildirs
34 matches
Mail list logo
