On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 10:09:29PM +0200, Jesper Holmberg wrote:
> * Michael Tatge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000807 20:39]:
> > GianPiero Puccioni muttered:
> > >
> > > I am using mutt 1.2.4i on a RedHat 6.1 using KDE and Konsole as a
> > > terminal. I installed it with the RPM found in mutt.linuxatwo
I'm curious: Why has the mail by Jesper no References:- or
In-Reply-To:-Header? Is it possible to disable this in mutt?
Best regards
Martin
--
Martin Schröder, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ArtCom GmbH, Grazer Straße 8, D-28359 Bremen
Voice +49 421 20419-44 / Fa
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 12:33:00AM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
> The result is a mess. I've yet to see a single Linux distribution which
> doesn't need terminfo hacking for all keys to be recognised correctly in
> all terminal emulators (things usually work fine in the Linux console...
...usua
Hi,
This may be a sendmail problem but I'll start off asking the question here.
I am trying to setup three mailboxes as follows:
Real users:A and B
Pseudo user: P
Users A and B each read their own private inboxes. They also read P's
inbox. A combination of .procmailrc and .muttrc acheive
Hello Mutt Users!
On pon 07 sie 2000 17:33:40 GMT Aaron Schrab wrote:
> I suspect that that's what's happening in this case, since the example
> message (which had Content-Type: text/plain) got modified by my procmail
> rules and mutt successfully checked the signature.
Yes, that's it and that's
msg.pgp
msg.pgp
msg.pgp
msg.pgp
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 06:11:05PM +1000, Rob Watkin wrote:
> I don't want the recipient to ever know the actual Linux account name which
> actually handled the mail but the recipient gets this:
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Is there any way to alter this field in .muttrc? Should I be
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 10:11:06AM +0200, Martin Schröder wrote:
> I'm curious: Why has the mail by Jesper no References:- or
> In-Reply-To:-Header? Is it possible to disable this in mutt?
AFAIK the only way to do it is to have $edit_headers set and then remove
them in your editor. (That's what
On 2000-08-07 16:49:55 -0500, Gary wrote:
> In reading your email in The Bat!, your signature is seen as an
> attachment (called "message.att) and not in-line with the
> message, which means one has to open it up separately. Is this
> normal with Mutt? How would you set your GPG sig in-line?
P
Hello All,
Is it somehow possible not to quote signatures on replies?
TIA.
--
Best regards,
Leonid Mamtchenkov
System administrator
J.F.Services Ltd. (Limassol, Cyprus)
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gary --
...and then Gary said...
% On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 06:39:17AM -0400 or thereabouts, David T-G wrote:
%
% > Content-Type: application/pgp; x-action=sign; format=text
% > Content-Disposition: inline; filename="msg.pgp"
...
% > Sure enough, your unmodified message is an old-style PGP messag
Leonid --
...and then Leonid Mamtchenkov said...
% Hello All,
%
% Is it somehow possible not to quote signatures on replies?
I don't think it's possible to tell mutt to leave it off, but it's pretty
easy to work up an entry macro for your editor that first prunes it off.
If that doesn't work, s
Ben Beuchler muttered:
> I've setup up a macro for sending mail as another "persona" that looks
> something like this:
>
> macro index M ":my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]m"
>
> What I'm trying to work out is a way to automatically switch back to
> using my normal information for any future emails
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 09:10:14AM -0400, David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...and then Leonid Mamtchenkov said...
> % Is it somehow possible not to quote signatures on replies?
>
> I don't think it's possible to tell mutt to leave it off, but it's pretty
> easy to work up an entry macro for
Can anybody tell me why this doesn't work:
set indent_string=`for x in %n; do echo $x | cut -c 1; done;`
Normally (when I run it manually from the shell) it works fine (of
course when I replace %n with some words).
--
Tomasz Olszewski
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Caster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 08 Aug 2000:
> Can anybody tell me why this doesn't work:
> set indent_string=`for x in %n; do echo $x | cut -c 1; done;`
> Normally (when I run it manually from the shell) it works fine (of
> course when I replace %n with some words).
I don't know for sur
Hello Mutt Users!
On wto 08 sie 2000 17:43:40 GMT Caster wrote:
> Can anybody tell me why this doesn't work:
> set indent_string=`for x in %n; do echo $x | cut -c 1; done;`
Of course I forgot about send-hook so it just couldn't work...
Eh...
--
lamest
Tomasz Olszewski
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2000-08-08 13:02:59 +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 10:11:06AM +0200, Martin Schröder wrote:
> > I'm curious: Why has the mail by Jesper no References:- or
> > In-Reply-To:-Header? Is it possible to disable this in mutt?
>
> AFAIK the only way to do it is to have $edit
Hello Mutt Users!
On pon 07 sie 2000 20:07:21 GMT Thomas Roessler wrote:
> Could you forward a complete message to this list, including all
> relevant headers, and the nested MIME stuff?
Wel, here it goes. I don't think it can be useful, because now I know
why the problems occurs (because his me
* Martin Schröder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000808 12:48]:
> I'm curious: Why has the mail by Jesper no References:- or
> In-Reply-To:-Header? Is it possible to disable this in mutt?
Well, this comes as a surprise to me as well. I have not knowingly
(nor manually) erased these headers. In fact, I've
On 2000-08-08 01:12:42 +0200, Caster wrote:
> Wel, here it goes. I don't think it can be useful, because now I
> know why the problems occurs (because his message contains an
> atachment) and procmail recipe doesn't call formail to rewrite
> the headers.
Yep... When I originally saw your note a
Hello Mutt Users!
On wto 08 sie 2000 20:28:16 GMT Thomas Roessler wrote:
> Yep... When I originally saw your note about multipart/mixed with
> PGP nessages, I speculated about a broken attempt to implement
> PGP/MIME, but this is just a MUA being creative and attaching the
> public key to messag
After some tries I found that my idea won't work :( Mutt doesn't
evaluate %n before sending it to a program so that programs receives
just "%n". There is now way to easily change this behaviour, I suppose?
--
Tomasz Olszewski
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 12:12 +0200 08 Aug 2000, Caster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On pon 07 sie 2000 17:33:40 GMT Aaron Schrab wrote:
> > But the rule that prevents this from happening with multipart messages
> > is necessary, because the modification that is done by that rule will
> > prevent mutt (or any MUA) fr
I have been reading through the GPG manual and it explains the
primary use of the GPG for signing files/documents. How can I use
GPG to sign email or encrypt email?
Thank you in advance.
--
Subba Rao
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/
=> Time is relative. Here is a new way to
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 11:16:25PM +, Subba Rao wrote:
> I have been reading through the GPG manual and it explains the
> primary use of the GPG for signing files/documents. How can I use
> GPG to sign email or encrypt email?
Make sure that you have gpg installed when you run Mutt's `configur
29 matches
Mail list logo
