* Nick Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-01-2002 10:41]:
| It doesn't look like I have 'patch' in my system, would there be a
| similar command?
You could add and remove lines by hand ;)
No, you really have to install patch. If you have any further
questions, lease send them in private, because th
* René Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020108 09:47]:
> * Nick Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-01-2002 09:20]:
>
> | > % And is there a way to name the sig attachment? It's confusing some
> | > % people and I'd rather they didn't think I was sending them stuff they
> | > % _had_ to open.
> | >
> | > I
* Nick Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-01-2002 09:51]:
| Thanks Rene, er where do I find the mutt tree?
| When I compiled it I just did it in my home dir, if that's what you mean
| then is it possible to move the mutt tree to a more appropriate place?
Mine is in /usr/src/mutt-1.3.25, but I do
> | > % And is there a way to name the sig attachment? It's confusing some
> | > % people and I'd rather they didn't think I was sending them stuff they
> | > % _had_ to open.
> | >
> | > If you use both $p_c_t and $p_o_c then LookOut! will be able to handle
> | > it even though it's named someth
* Nick Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-01-2002 09:20]:
| > % And is there a way to name the sig attachment? It's confusing some
| > % people and I'd rather they didn't think I was sending them stuff they
| > % _had_ to open.
| >
| > If you use both $p_c_t and $p_o_c then LookOut! will be able to
> or from my site at
>
> http://mutt.justpickone.org/
>
> in the build cocktail directory as patch-1.3.15.sw.pgp-outlook.1 (yes,
> the .15 version applies cleanly to the .25 source).
>
>
> %
> % And is there a way to name the sig attachment? It's confusing some
> % people and I'd rather the
Nick --
...and then Nick Wilson said...
%
% * Justin R. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020107 21:36]:
% > Thus spake Nick Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
% >
% > > the fact that the body of the mail (like this text) was received as an
% > > attatchment that she had to open.
% > >
% > > That can't be
* Justin R. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020107 21:36]:
> Thus spake Nick Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > Sorry, my post was unclear. I'm not really worried about the sig. It's
> > the fact that the body of the mail (like this text) was received as an
> > attatchment that she had to open.
> >
>
Thus spake Nick Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Sorry, my post was unclear. I'm not really worried about the sig. It's
> the fact that the body of the mail (like this text) was received as an
> attatchment that she had to open.
>
> That can't be right sure?
That is a result of Outlook not listeni
* Will Yardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020107 20:51]:
> Nick Wilson wrote:
>
> > Actually, two attachments one of which is the pgp sig. What would
> > cause my emails to be sent as attachments rather than inline(if that's
> > the right term)?
>
> this is mutt's default behavior. you can do:
> pgp_
Nick Wilson wrote:
> Actually, two attachments one of which is the pgp sig. What would
> cause my emails to be sent as attachments rather than inline(if that's
> the right term)?
this is mutt's default behavior. you can do:
pgp_create_traditional
but this still sends it as 'application/pgp-sig
Hi all
I'm certain this is something I've done but just can't work out what.
I just spoke to my mum who said the email I'd sent had come through as
an attachment as opposed to in the body of the message when she opened
it?
Actually, two attachments one of which is the pgp sig. What would cause
m
12 matches
Mail list logo
