On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 09:26:31PM -0400, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 08:30:40PM -0400, Brenda J. Butler wrote:
> >
> > I'm trying to use GPG via mutt, and I find there is an annoying
> > two-second wait every time I hit a signed message in the index
> > while GPG verifies i
On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 02:22:47PM -0400, Sweth Chandramouli wrote:
[...]
Forgive me for not responding to each part of your message, but I was
getting confused, too. One of the things to keep in mind when you're
using folder-hooks to add send-hooks is that mutt will just keep adding
new send-h
Johan --
...and then Johan Svedberg said...
%
% Hi!
Hello!
%
% I was just wondering if it's possible to have "two word" aliases? Like
% alias foo bar John Doe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>? Using "" doesn't seem to do it
The closest you'll be able to get is "foo.bar" or "foo_bar" if not just
plain ol
Hi!
I was just wondering if it's possible to have "two word" aliases? Like
alias foo bar John Doe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>? Using "" doesn't seem to do it
either, any ideas?
/winkle
--
|Mail address |Home telephonenumber|E-mail address |
|Johan Svedberg |+46 (0)90 49 139
--Qxx1br4bt0+wmkIi
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Alas! David T-G spake thus:
> Rob, et al --
>=20
> [Even if Sean sent to @gbnet.net that doesn't mean you should, young man.]
Nah, I let mutt figure out where to
Sweth --
...and then Sweth Chandramouli said...
%
...
% I'd say that that's accurate, except I'd change the
% phrases "sending in general" to "sending in general except to another
% list", which I think is what you meant anyways.
It was; good enough.
%
...
% > folder-hook =3Dlists/mu
I've been castigated a couple of times for using the gbnet
address for sending mail to mutt-users, and it confused me, because I
thought I had changed that definition in my configs; I just noticed
that the problem might be that mutt-users-digest (which I receive)
sets the reply-to to the g
On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 09:42:50PM -, mutt-users-digest wrote:
> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:04:03 -0500
> From: David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)
>
> Your description is a little convoluted. Please allow me to attempt to
> clearly rest
On 2002-06-11, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Christoph Bugel [02-06-11 22:21:30 +0200] wrote:
> > My observation is that if someone with mutt-1.2.5 replies
> > to a message by user1, it generates the following header:
>
> > In-Reply-To: <"from user1"@host1.org>
>
> The problem is that mutt can
* Johan Svedberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-06-11 22:59 +0200]:
> I was just wondering if there is some configuration in mutt that makes it possible
>for you to reply to a message without actually "modifying" the original message (used
>when confirming mailinglists subscriptions), all I get now i
[ please wrap lines at something around 72 characters ]
Hi,
* Johan Svedberg [02-06-11 23:36:23 +0200] wrote:
> I was just wondering if there is some configuration in
> mutt that makes it possible for you to reply to a message
> without actually "modifying" the original message (used
> when conf
Hi,
* Christoph Bugel [02-06-11 22:21:30 +0200] wrote:
> My observation is that if someone with mutt-1.2.5 replies
> to a message by user1, it generates the following header:
> In-Reply-To: <"from user1"@host1.org>
The problem is that mutt cannot reliably distinct between a
message-id and a mai
Hi,
* Charles Curley [02-06-11 22:21:29 +0200] wrote:
[...]
> Is there a (fairly) painless way to get the mail from the
> laptop onto the desktop?
> Can I simply append files (e.g. "cat /mnt/nfs/laptop/mutt
> >> mutt").
If you use mbox, yes. If you've already set up procmail
there's most like
Johan --
...and then Johan Svedberg said...
%
% Hi!
Hello!
%
% I was just wondering if there is some configuration in mutt that makes it possible
for you to reply to a message without actually "modifying" the original message (used
when confirming mailinglists subscriptions), all I get now
Hi!
I was just wondering if there is some configuration in mutt that makes it possible for
you to reply to a message without actually "modifying" the original message (used when
confirming mailinglists subscriptions), all I get now is just "Aborted unmodified
message.". If there isn't, this mi
> Can I simply append files (e.g. "cat /mnt/nfs/laptop/mutt >> mutt"). If I do
> this, will mutt or any other software get confused because some of the
> messages are out of date order by almost a month?
My favorite way to handle this, assuming you don't have too many folders, is
to just change i
[ you should try to avoid using tabs in mail/news ]
Hi,
* Sweth Chandramouli [02-06-11 20:30:56 +0200] wrote:
> My new project: trying to deal with my mailing lists
> correctly. I have a bunch of lists, each with its own
> folder under =lists, to which I'm subscribed.
Here, too, nothing specia
I am using mutt 1.4, and it sometimes gets the threads wrong.
The symptom is that some messages of a thread wil appear in an entirely
unrelated thread..
My observation is that if someone with mutt-1.2.5 replies to a message by user1,
it generates the following header:
In-Reply-To: <"from user1"@
I just made a major OOPS: I went to delete an old copy of my ~/Mail
directory and accidentally deleted the working copy instead. OOPS!
I was able to recover from tape to the last backup, as of mid-May. I
have since turned on fetchmail, so I will have recent messages in
my files by the time you re
* Adam Shostack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [06-11-02 11:20]:
> It seems that messages re-sent (esc-e) are not being saved to my sent
> folder. In particular, I have a long message that I want to respond
> to in chunks; I used esc-e to re-send it, edit it up, and send it.
> When I go into ~/sent (where
On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 03:17:16PM -0400, Mike Arrison wrote:
> Mutters,
> I can't figure out how to make a folder-hook that will set the
> bcc field. Basically whenever I'm in folder "abc", I'd like to bcc an
> address. I can't figure how to make it work with a send-hook either.
> I'm t
Mutters,
I can't figure out how to make a folder-hook that will set the
bcc field. Basically whenever I'm in folder "abc", I'd like to bcc an
address. I can't figure how to make it work with a send-hook either.
I'm thinking something like this:
folder-hook abc 'set bcc="[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 02:22:47PM -0400, Sweth Chandramouli wrote:
[...sniiip..]
> So, I'm totally confused now. What gives?
i don't know. ;-) but i have a suggestion in the form of a question
because i don't have time to play with it myself. is it possible to get
rid of t
Sweth --
Your description is a little convoluted. Please allow me to attempt to
clearly restate your goal and confirm or deny the presentation.
In =lists/mutt
sending in general (to the list, to me, to your mom)
From: mutt@yoursite
In =lists/loganalysis
sending in general (to the list,
At 08:42 -0400 11 Jun 2002, darren chamberlain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> send-hook gets executed when you send the message, not when you start a
> message. Thus, you see the results for the next message.
No, send-hooks get executed before a message is composed, but only after
mutt has generat
OK, I'm having lots of issues with send-hooks recently,
it seems. My new project: trying to deal with my mailing lists
correctly. I have a bunch of lists, each with its own folder under
=lists, to which I'm subscribed. In my ideal situation, when I send
mail to any of those lists, I wan
Turns out this is a "feature"/bug that has been fixed in 1.4
John
On 06/11/02, 11:49:46AM -0400, Adam Shostack wrote:
> It seems that messages re-sent (esc-e) are not being saved to my sent
> folder. In particular, I have a long message that I want to respond
> to in chunks; I used esc-e to re-
It seems that messages re-sent (esc-e) are not being saved to my sent
folder. In particular, I have a long message that I want to respond
to in chunks; I used esc-e to re-send it, edit it up, and send it.
When I go into ~/sent (where all my other saved mail is), there's no
copy.
Is this a (mis
Other Cygwin users on this list may be interested in some
sources of information directly from Cygwin maintainers:
http://www.tishler.net/jason/software/fetchmail/fetchmail-5.9.12.README
http://www.tishler.net/jason/software/procmail/procmail-3.22.README
In general, the cygwin mailing list does
Jussi --
...and then Jussi Ekholm said...
%
...
% But I was just wondering about the logic Muttþ uses with hooks.
It all depends.
No, really! Some hooks can be applied more than once, so mutt reads all
of those definitions and applies the union of the sets. Some hooks can
only be applied onc
Brenda, et al --
...and then Brenda J. Butler said...
%
% I asked this on a local linux user list, and was advised
% that perhaps mutt-users would be a better place to
...
% > I'm trying to use GPG via mutt, and I find there is an annoying
% > two-second wait every time I hit a signed message in
Ah, ok. Thanks for the replies. It was indeed the order. :)
-Ken
* AxUm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-06-11 03:00]:
> Michael Tatge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > set realname="Oliver Fuchs"
> > set [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > set use_from # should be default
> > set envelope_from # see manual section 6.3.43.
>
> Humm, even with that the from in a send hooks only take
I wanted to ask about different hooks and their logic. Here's and
example of a send-hook:
send-hook '~t ^foo\.bar@baz\.qux$' 'set signature=~/.sigs/sig.foo'
This, at least, *should* add ~/.sigs/sig.foo to all mails sent to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - and that it does. But on the flip-side, it adds t
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 03:31:39PM +0200, Stefan Friedle wrote:
>I use fetchmail to fetch mail from my POP account and use procmail to
> deliver it to my local maildir (~/Maildir/inbox/). All with cygwin on
> Windows NT. In my .fetchmailrc there is a line:
>
> mda: 'procmail -m D:/home/.p
35 matches
Mail list logo
