Eudora breaks atatchments from the messages and keeps them in a directory. Each
mailbox has an index
file which keeps tracks of what belongs to what.
Apologies to he to whome I replied by accident instead of this list.
Quoting Jon Walthour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> There is another option, as well
There is another option, as well. Get a copy of Eudora (not Eudora Lite) and convert
them through there. I did this some time ago. So, I don't remember all the details.
But Eudora (and I just downloaded a trial version rather than buying it) will convert
the Outlook .pst to standard mail format
Jeff, et al --
...and then Fairlight said...
% On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 10:57:41AM -0500, Jeff Abrahamson thus spoke:
% >
% > I'm trying to switch someone from Outlook to mutt. I've found
Yay! :-)
% > utilities on the net to convert his address book, but I've had no
% > success finding utiliti
On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 10:57:41AM -0500, Jeff Abrahamson thus spoke:
> This is more mutt advocacy than usage, and is perhaps more general
> than just mutt. Well, hope it's still appropriate.
>
> I'm trying to switch someone from Outlook to mutt. I've found
> utilities on the net to convert his a
++ 19.03.1999, 18:12:13 (-0800) = Russell Van Tassell:
>If you take a close look at each and every message, you'll notice the
>following consistencies between them:
[...]
> - "Precedence:" is set to "bulk"
But if you have a closer look at other mails as well you will notice
this last one is a ver
This really should be on the Procmail list (send a request to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]), but... so far, I think
everyone's not right...
If you're trying to use procmail to filter everything on this list in
to a foler, you to go for a header that the list software will
set for every message it sends o
Greetings,
On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 01:23:56PM +0100, Holger Eitzenberger wrote:
> BTW, doesn't Majordomo generate X-Mailing-List: entries in the
> header? I use procmail to copy everything from coming from a
> mailing list to the appropriate +inbox.. However
> Majordomo does _not generate_ it
++ 17.03.1999, 10:18:15 (+0100) = [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>:0
>*^TO.*mutt-users@*
>mutt
>
>(just wonder if the dot makes a difference to where you put it).
You mean the dot after TO? That one definatelly does make a difference.
The dot means 'any character except a newline'. The asterix says 'any
sequ
++ 17.03.1999, 16:04:26 (+0100) = [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> * Sender: .*mutt-users.*
>
>but then it might expect to find a dot "." after "mutt-users", instead of any
>other character (*), or?
Nope. Dot means 'any character except newline'. That's what it says in
the manpage for procmailrc.
-Rejo.
-
> The issue here is that ^TO doesn't match sender, which is the
> best way I've found to match majordomo mailing lists.
Agreed.
> If someone bcc's to the list, procmail wont catch it.
Most of the bccs I get are spam, and my last (in order)
procmail recipe puts all bccs in a separate folder
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 05:36:05PM +0100, Klaus Wacker wrote:
> The .* at the end is superfluous, but you probably want to anchor the
> "Sender:" at the beginning of the line. So the line
Point. I forgot the ^.
> * ^TOmutt-(users|announce)@.*(cs.hmc.edu|mutt.org|gbnet.net)
The issue here is th
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 09:03:30AM +0100, Rejo wrote:
> ++ 15.03.1999, 13:23:56 (+0100) = Holger Eitzenberger:
> >Majordomo does _not generate_ it and i haven't found another
> >criteria to detect mutt-user mails.
It generates
Mail-Followup-To: Mutt Users <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Can this be
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 09:03:30AM +0100, Rejo wrote:
> ++ 15.03.1999, 13:23:56 (+0100) = Holger Eitzenberger:
> >Majordomo does _not generate_ it and i haven't found another
> >criteria to detect mutt-user mails.
It generates
Mail-Followup-To: Mutt Users <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Can this be
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 09:03:30AM +0100, Rejo wrote:
> ++ 15.03.1999, 13:23:56 (+0100) = Holger Eitzenberger:
> >Majordomo does _not generate_ it and i haven't found another
> >criteria to detect mutt-user mails.
Most mutt installations will generate
Mail-Followup-To: Mutt Users <[EMAIL
Warning
Could not process message with given Content-Type:
multipart/signed; boundary=C7zPtVaVf+AK4Oqc; micalg=pgp-md5;protocol="application/pgp-signature"
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 04:04:26PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > * Sender: .*mutt-users.*
>
> but then it might expect to find a dot "." after "mutt-users", instead of any
> other character (*), or?
No. The regular expression . will match any character. The * will
make zero or more of th
Jeffrey Haas dixit:
>
> I would recommend instead:
> :0:
> * Sender: .*mutt-users.*
> mutt-users
>
> This is much saner in case of bcc's and other things.
but then it might expect to find a dot "." after "mutt-users", instead of any
other character (*), or?
Horacio.
--
Claves - GnuPG/PGP - Ke
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 09:03:30AM +0100, Rejo wrote:
> :0:
> * ^TO(.*mutt-users)
> mutt-users
>
I would recommend instead:
:0:
* Sender: .*mutt-users.*
mutt-users
This is much saner in case of bcc's and other things.
> -Rejo.
--
Jeffrey Haas
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Place all beliefs in
Warning
Could not process message with given Content-Type:
multipart/signed; boundary=uQr8t48UFsdbeI+V; micalg=pgp-sha1;protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Rejo dixit:
> ++ 15.03.1999, 13:23:56 (+0100) = Holger Eitzenberger:
> >Majordomo does _not generate_ it and i haven't found another
> >criteria to detect mutt-user mails.
>
> I have now (in procmail):
>
> :0:
> * ^TO([EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> mutt-users
>
> Which
++ 15.03.1999, 13:23:56 (+0100) = Holger Eitzenberger:
>Majordomo does _not generate_ it and i haven't found another
>criteria to detect mutt-user mails.
I have now (in procmail):
:0:
* ^TO([EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED])
mutt-users
Which probably could be rewritten to
:
On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 02:12:58PM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> > BTW, doesn't Majordomo generate X-Mailing-List: entries in the
> > header? I use procmail to copy everything from coming from a
> > mailing list to the appropriate +inbox.. However
> > Majordomo does _not generate_ it and i have
On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 01:23:56PM +0100, Holger Eitzenberger wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 10:53:14PM +1100, Russ Pitman wrote:
>
> > Ok as above, now could let me know what has to be done to get mutt to see
> > my mail. mutt looks in /var/spool/mail/rjpp which is always empty.
> > I us
> BTW, doesn't Majordomo generate X-Mailing-List: entries in the
> header? I use procmail to copy everything from coming from a
> mailing list to the appropriate +inbox.. However
> Majordomo does _not generate_ it and i haven't found another
> criteria to detect mutt-user mails.
TO_ works pr
On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 10:53:14PM +1100, Russ Pitman wrote:
> Ok as above, now could let me know what has to be done to get mutt to see
> my mail. mutt looks in /var/spool/mail/rjpp which is always empty.
> I use procmail to stash the incoming in ~/mail/INBOX,etc,etc,etc.
> Would m
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Petr Hlustik wrote:
> Peter van Dijk wrote:
>
> >
> > Sure you can, just put all folders in a 'mailboxes' line in your .muttrc
>
> I have used the following entries to emulate Pine defaults (I have
> occasionally switched back and forth for a while):
>
> # Make the m
On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 07:49:31PM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> The script is called aladalcurm.py.
> [ALl ADresses ALiassed with CURses Menu]
> It is written using Python (http://www.python.org) and curses.
Personally it's way to clever for me to remember - how about 'take-email.py'
On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 09:41:11AM -0500, Petr Hlustik wrote:
SNIP
>
> There is also a perl script to convert Pine's .addressbook to mutt
> format. I have to admit, I still miss in Mutt the ability of Pine to "take"
> addresses from the body of the e-mails (it can do the From: field).
I was als
On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 08:51:44AM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 07, 1999 at 10:38:59PM +1100, Russ Pitman wrote:
> >
> > Currently using Pine 4.x. Can I use my existing ~/HOME/mail
> > structure, or should it be rebuilt. If this is a rtfm ask, which doco and
> > where?
On Sun, Mar 07, 1999 at 10:38:59PM +1100, Russ Pitman wrote:
>
> Currently using Pine 4.x. Can I use my existing ~/HOME/mail
> structure, or should it be rebuilt. If this is a rtfm ask, which doco and
> where?
Sure you can, just put all folders in a 'mailboxes' line in your .
30 matches
Mail list logo
