On Tue, Mar 26, 2002, Martin Karlsson wrote:
> And now all Solaris-users can enjoy the MS Outlook
> Express-experience ;-)
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/unix/ie/evaluation/outlookexp/default.asp
And if it's anything like IE for Solaris, it sucks. Ever since 3.0,
Netscape IMO has gotten more and
begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 04:31:01PM +0100:
>
> The point is that there're lots of people having to use it at work. Even
> if those people are familiar to the standards, what shall they do if
> they're not abled to convince someone with the power of decission no
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 08:25:21:AM -0500 Shawn McMahon wrote:
> begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 12:04:14AM +0100:
> >
> > Just wondering why 1524 is so important to you...
> You lost me.
You lost me. We lost us. ;-)
> To the best of my knowledge, I have never
* Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-25 19.58 +0100]:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 12:18:11:PM -0500 Shawn McMahon wrote:
> > begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 06:12:41AM +0100:
> > >
> > > Not that I know, but it is quite dangerous to talk about Outlook in
begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 12:04:14AM +0100:
>
> Just wondering why 1524 is so important to you...
You lost me. To the best of my knowledge, I have never discussed
RFC1524 in this or any other mailing list, prior to this exchange.
RFC1521 is important to me be
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 03:14:14:PM -0500 Shawn McMahon wrote:
> begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 07:58:17PM +0100:
> >
> > > At the very least, it doesn't read RFC1521-compliant mails as
> > > recommended in the standard.
> >
> > Which has status informational o
begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 07:58:17PM +0100:
>
> > At the very least, it doesn't read RFC1521-compliant mails as
> > recommended in the standard.
>
> Which has status informational only.
Ok, first, wrong, it's standards-track, not informational.
However, it *I
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 12:18:11:PM -0500 Shawn McMahon wrote:
> begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 06:12:41AM +0100:
> >
> > Not that I know, but it is quite dangerous to talk about Outlook in the
> > context of mail clients.
> Oh, it is a mail client, it's just n
begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 06:12:41AM +0100:
>
> Not that I know, but it is quite dangerous to talk about Outlook in the
> context of mail clients.
Oh, it is a mail client, it's just not an Internet mail client.
At the very least, it doesn't read RFC1521-compli
Hi Rob!
On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
> Care to give some examples?
folder-hook =folder 'push T~r>1m\n' if [ ~T ]; then 'push \;s=archiv\n' fi
--
[ markus hubig ] [ mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [ debian/gnu linux (sid) ]
[ vorholzstrasse 6 ] [ saft: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [
Rocco Rutte ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 02:09:41:PM -0700 Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
>
> > Care to give some examples?
>
> if [ muttversion != "1.5.0" ]; then
> source ~/.mutt/setup/nntp
> fi
Quoting the fine manual section 3.0:
In addition, mutt supports v
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 02:50:29:PM +0100 Sven Guckes wrote:
> * Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-22 01:40]:
> > At least connditionals are absolutely missing
> > in mutt's config file functionality.
> .. and also missing with setup files
> for elm, pine, outlook, ...
"All mail clie
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 02:09:41:PM -0700 Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
> Care to give some examples?
if [ muttversion != "1.5.0" ]; then
source ~/.mutt/setup/nntp
fi
But you're right, this one may be done with a bash script. But - to me -
it looks ugly havin a good mail client and some sort
Alas! Rob Reid spake thus:
> > I don't understand why mutt so desperately needs a scripting language.
>
> I wasn't saying it does.
Sorry, I didn't mean _you_ were saying that, but some people have and I
didn't get why.
> > What's wrong with the backtick evaluation that the .muttrc already has?
On Sun 24-Mar-2002 at 02:09:41PM -0700, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
>
> I can't think of anything that can be done with a scripting language
> built into the .muttrc that can't be done with a bash script being
> evaluated with backticks inside the regular .muttrc. (but then again,
> I haven't put _t
At 4:09 PM EST on March 24 Rob 'Feztaa' Park sent off:
> Alas! Rob Reid spake thus:
> > If mutt could pass variables like the current folder to the environment, then
> > this "mutt needs a scripting language, but no, that's bloated, and
> > which one would we use?" thread would probably recur les
* Rob 'Feztaa' Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-24 14:09:41 -0700]:
> Alas! Rob Reid spake thus:
> > If mutt could pass variables like the current folder to the environment, then
> > this "mutt needs a scripting language, but no, that's bloated, and
> > which one would we use?" thread would proba
--KdquIMZPjGJQvRdI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Alas! Rob Reid spake thus:
> If mutt could pass variables like the current folder to the environment, =
then
> this "mutt needs a scripting language, but no, that
begin quoting what Rob Reid said on Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 03:01:35PM -0500:
>
> If mutt could pass variables like the current folder to the environment, then
> this "mutt needs a scripting language, but no, that's bloated, and
> which one would we use?" thread would probably recur less frequently
At 8:50 AM EST on March 24 Sven Guckes sent off:
> * Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-22 01:40]:
> > At least connditionals are absolutely missing
> > in mutt's config file functionality.
>
> . and also missing with setup files
> for elm, pine, outlook, ..
>
> Btw: which mailers *have*
* Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-22 01:40]:
> At least connditionals are absolutely missing
> in mutt's config file functionality.
.. and also missing with setup files
for elm, pine, outlook, ...
Btw: which mailers *have* a "setup language"?
ok - emacs. any else?
Sven
21 matches
Mail list logo
