Pat --
...and then MuttER said...
%
% On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 01:31:45AM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
% >
% > i use a patch from:
% >
% > http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/mutt/#attach
...
%
% This should be considered for incorporation as an included
% feature/option/whatever.
Lots of feature pat
On Wed, 09 Jan 2002, Michael Tatge wrote:
>
> %Z includes the to_chars characters
>
Ok, that's what I needed to know. Thanks!
--
Knute
You live, You die. Enjoy the interval!
-- Clarence
Knute muttered:
> On Wed, 09 Jan 2002, MuttER wrote:
>
> I added the %T for the to_chars stuff in my index.
> What I noticed is that the Message Statuses seem to echo that to a
> certain extent. (I only did it today, and have yet to see difference.)
>
> What is the diff between the to_chars
On Wed, 09 Jan 2002, MuttER wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 01:31:45AM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
> > Jim Mock wrote:
> > >
> > > Is there a flag for to_chars to display whether or not the message
> > > contains an attachment? I looked through the manual, but don't see
> > > one (appears th
On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 01:31:45AM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
> Jim Mock wrote:
> >
> > Is there a flag for to_chars to display whether or not the message
> > contains an attachment? I looked through the manual, but don't see
> > one (appears there's only " +TCFL"). Am I missing something or is
Jim Mock wrote:
>
> Is there a flag for to_chars to display whether or not the message
> contains an attachment? I looked through the manual, but don't see
> one (appears there's only " +TCFL"). Am I missing something or is
> there some other way to do this?
i use a patch from:
http://home.uc
Howdy all,
Is there a flag for to_chars to display whether or not the message
contains an attachment? I looked through the manual, but don't see one
(appears there's only " +TCFL"). Am I missing something or is there
some other way to do this?
- jim
--
jim mock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://s
