mutt-users-digest uses gbnet address

o the gbnet address. Is there any way that that can be changed? -- Sweth. -- Sweth Chandramouli Idiopathic Systems Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.idiopathic.net/

Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

me problem for my cartesian join. So, does anybody know why I'm seeing the behaviour I'm seeing? Is it a bug, or a "feature"? David -- I can't find anything in the manpage about a debug log; is it a compile-time option? TIA, Sweth. -- Sweth Chandramouli Idiopathic Systems Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.idiopathic.net/

More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

because the mutt-folder send-hook and the default-folder send-hook both are send-hooks with idential patterns, so if that were true then I should be seeing just one of them running at a time. So, I'm totally confused now. What gives? -- Sweth. -- Sweth Chandramouli Idiopathic Systems Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.idiopathic.net/

Re: When is send-hook applied?

On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 01:15:28AM -, mutt-users-digest wrote: > Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 15:07:58 -0700 > From: Michael Elkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: When is send-hook applied? > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:29:30PM -0400, Sweth Chandramouli wrote: > >

When is send-hook applied?

er headers like "From:". Is that the problem? If so, is there any way to accomplish what I want? TIA, Sweth. -- Sweth Chandramouli Idiopathic Systems Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.idiopathic.net/

pre-send actions

Are there any hooks in mutt for taking actions immediately before sending a message (e.g. caching recipient lists for later use), or should I just create a wrapper for sendmail? -- Sweth. -- Sweth Chandramouli ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> President, Idiopathic Systems Consulting

Old reply_regexp question

l, unfortunately, or I would just hack together a patch myself.) Does something like this seem reasonable/feasible? Now that I've thought of it, lots of other situations where that kind of flexibility would be useful are occurring to me, so I imagine something like this would be useful

Re: Reply-To more than one recipient

dress. the last sentence in the portion you snipped quite clearly states that the header SHOULD appear, which is distinct from MUST appear; having a sender-address is recommended if there is more than one apparent sender, but not having it does not make a message invalid. -- sweth. -- Sweth Chandramouli ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://astaroth.nit.gwu.edu/resume/">Will Work For Food. http://astaroth.nit.gwu.edu/~sweth/disc.html">*