in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote parv/fastmail thusly...
>
> grep & awk, otoh, use gnu linux library...
hehe ... i meant gnu regex library
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote parv/fastmail thusly...
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> wrote David T-G thusly...
> >
> > fcc-save-hook (s(ue|)shaw)=D.oaks/%_%O
> >
> > which cause mutt some unhappiness when built under freebsd
he following work in /mutt/ ...
fcc-save-hook '(s(ue)?shaw)' =blah
...i have no clue as to why your regex causes error on freebsd.
some regex library/function perhaps?
as a side point, egrep & perl produce expected output on freebsd
4.6-release w/ the original regex.
- parv
--
in message <20020618181536.GA3827@Verdi>,
wrote John P Verel thusly...
>
> I have it bound to \cr The help screen shows it as bound to upper
> case r, e.g. ^R. I guess I'd forgotten that macros are case
> insensitive (correct?) and was looking for ^r.
case is immaterial
when bound w/ "\c"
matt
Jun 13 22:14
512 Ignore/ Jun 13 22:07
512 Out/ Jun 13 21:59
...in ~/mail/In ...
343860 i.ipf-ipfw Jun 13 21:21 parv
137587 i.f-bugsJun 13 21:15 parv
1015961 i.mutt Jun 13 21:14 parv
...and in ~/mail/Out ...
512 ../ Jun 13 21:10 parv
4143 out.use
in message <20020606201430.GA25992@sumida>,
wrote Kevin Coyner thusly...
>
>
> Second, 3 quick questions:
this is getting ridiculous people!
use more descriptive subject instead of "help" equivalent. if
cannot come up w/ a unified subject, ask in separate e-mails then.
- parv
--
oblem/feature?
another "me too" ... i experience the behaviour, as john i. posted,
everytime while mail is being delivered.
on a different note, dean, please keep the author and/or email
address in your attribution so that there is a way to tell who
said what.
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote parv/fastmail thusly...
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> wrote Sven Guckes thusly...
> >
> > * parv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-19 19:39]:
> > > wrote Sven Guckes thusly...
> ...
>
;, in
thread "formail to split digest with indented From and Date", sent
on mar. 23 2002 w/ <005201c1d2be$1e295910$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
as the message-id.
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Sven Guckes thusly...
>
> * parv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-19 19:39]:
> > wrote Sven Guckes thusly...
...
> > > :0
> > > * ^[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > IN.MUTT
> > >
> > > :0
> > >
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote John Iverson thusly...
>
> * On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, parv wrote:
>
> > all these can be easily combined as one OR'd recipe (assuming mbox)...
> >
> > :0:
> > * 2147483647^0 ^TOmutt-users@mail\.sonytel\.be
> >
us infinity' (2147483647) is reached, any
subsequent weighted conditions will simply be skipped
As soon as `minus infinity' (-2147483647) is reached, the
condition will be considered as `no match' and the recipe
will terminate early.
...see various procmail man & web pages and mailing list for other details.
- parv
--
it as if it's a regular mailbox that way.
if one needs that functionality, sure, use mutt instead.
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote s. keeling thusly...
>
> - _Something_ doesn't show you new mail 'til a few days after it
> arrives ('cause you have to wait for possible duplicates to
> arrive). Inconvenient, but for those who can't stand seeing
> duplicates (or the wrong dupl
ything in muttrc(5) or when searched for
(flag-message|flagged) in the manual. has this feature already been
implemented or is in the plans?
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Charles Jie thusly...
>
...
> I tried:
>
> bind pager t tag-thread
>
> I tried again:
>
> macro pager t tag-thread
>
> . It got wrong action though I can see it right with '?'.
> . It just tags a single message and prompts me to define an
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Louis-David Mitterrand thusly...
>
> After much struggle understanding mutt's quoting rules I finally came up
> with that kind of stuff, which works:
>
> folder-hook =[a-z] score ~s'([ot]\\|newbie\\|off-topic\\|your\\\
>mail\\|(unidentified\\|no)\\\
dth" variable (and perhaps 'wrapmargin' too). you
can set that w/ "set tw=70".
fmt is very inadequate, compared to 'gq', when it comes to wrapping
of quoted lines. just try it, you will see.
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Thomas Hurst thusly...
>
> * Michael Seiwert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > mutt detects an error in one of the following lines but I can't find
> > an error maybe you see the error.
> >
> > color body redblack "(*)(ACK|ROTFL|LO
i blurted...
> color index brightwhite default "~C (parv_@yahoo\.com|parv@(localhost|.*holy\.cow))"
>
> ...i get error message while starting mutt...
to which replied Benjamin Smith thusly (and Jeremy Blosser gave the
similar reply)...
>
> Easily solved. This is du
hi,
i tried...
#color index brightwhite default "~C $alternates"
color index brightwhite default "~C (parv_@yahoo\.com|parv@(localhost|.*holy\.cow))"
...i get error message while starting mutt...
Error in /home/parv/cf/mail/mutt.cf, line 58: parentheses not balanced
rse" to work when i tried.
as far as building from cvs goes, i will wait until that version is
released to the masses. it's a gushy & gooey feeling that above
behaviour will be available from the mutt itself.
did i thank the developers of mutt yet? well, thank you
developers & maintainers of the mailer that sucks the least.
- parv
--
indicator ")
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote parv thusly...
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> wrote Nicolas Rachinsky thusly...
> >
> > * "Justin R. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> > > Without conditional checking (which is
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Nicolas Rachinsky thusly...
>
> * On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 03:25:32PM -0500,
> * "Justin R. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Thus spake parv ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > >
> > > problem is whe
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote parv thusly...
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> wrote Justin R. Miller thusly...
> >
> ...
> > folder-hook . push 'T~N~P\n;N\n\ct.\n'
> >
> > Note that this is untested, but what I think I&
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Jeremy Blosser thusly...
>
> On Jan 29, parv [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > wrote Justin R. Miller thusly...
> > > folder-hook . push 'T~N~P\n;N\n\ct.\n'
> >
&
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Jeremy Blosser thusly...
>
> On Jan 29, parv [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
...
> > enough w/ all the fudging! given all the guesses flying around, i
> > fed up and tried on my own. so here it is...
>
> Er, what fudging?
r at least worked once.
can anybody enlighten me why the variation below does not?
folder-hook . push 'T~N~P\n;\efN\cT~P\n'
...where...
bind index \ef clear-flag
bind index \cT untag-pattern
...all this hook is does is tag the "~N~P" message. it does not go
beyond that.
- parv
--
t i kept
getting "unknown command" w/...
folder-hook . ''
...and "too many arguments" w/ ...
folder-hook . 'push T~P'
...so i resorted to create a key binding and execute it as shown.
given above quoted folder-hook syntax, it seems now that i may not
be using the right syntax for "push". however the given "push"
syntax seems too cryptic to follow w/o a manual on hand.
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Mathias Gygax thusly...
>
> i'm subscribed to over 150 mailing lists and get over 1700 mails a day.
>
> mutt performs very well, even on not so speedy computers.
i thought we were telling roman n. how good or bad is our mda,
a la procmail & mdforward, of ch
t's
possible to some degree; eventually one has to create extra
recipe(s) to take care of remaining AND/OR logic.
- parv
--
ources wise, a bit on a single user,
me, stand alone machine.
> - reportedly isn't completely safe (can lose your mail)
...
use proper locking w/ maildir folders & well tested recipes.
personally, i use mbox folders w/ locking and saving every mail
as caught by a recipe that i may be working on.
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote David T-G thusly...
>
> parv --
>
> ...and then parv said...
> %
> % i am using mutt 1.3.25i version and the following key binding/macro
> % is not working anymore; it used to in some 1.2 version...
> %
> % macro index \cO
i am using mutt 1.3.25i version and the following key binding/macro
is not working anymore; it used to in some 1.2 version...
macro index \cO ' ~r>1m\;s ' "move >1 month old
mail"
...however, manually hitting the equivalent key sequence does as
intended. is there as i keep threads collapsed.
in message <20020119162342.A16695@Verdi>,
wrote John P Verel thusly...
>
> Have you tried setting uncollapse_jump to yes? Perhaps this will help?
yes, that's what i have right now. i think i have set every thread
collapsing option to a positive response. (see the original message.)
none seem
in message <20020119061359.GA1695@knute>,
wrote Knute thusly...
>
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, parv wrote:
...
> > say, i am looking at the mailbox index. all the threads are
> > collapsed. as soon as new mail arrives, the thread receiving the
> > new mail gets un
does anybody know if there is/are patch/es so that thread could be
collapsed & uncollapsed unconditionally? currently, collapse-all
(& collapse-thread) is only a toggle.
are these functions going to be on the main source tree any time soon?
--
=alias
set sort_browser=reverse-date
set sort=threads
#set sort=reverse-threads
set sort_aux=last-date-received
set sort_re=yes
...
# collapse all threads in any folder
folder-hook . 'push \eV'
thanks much.
- parv
--
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Lance Simmons thusly...
>
> Let me ask a more general question: how do others on the list keep
> high-traffic mailboxes from continually impinging on their
> consciousness, while still routinely following traffic in those
> mailboxes?
until now, i didn't kn
3.25i, w/o any problems. syntax is...
color index red default ~P
^- notice the missing '%'
...so how does the patch figure in?
>Although that would only work if your message was in the same
>mailbox.
i didn't understand the above statement. when you say "message(s)
in the same mailbox", what do you mean by it?
- parv
--
41 matches
Mail list logo
