On Jan 24, Brian Clark [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> OK, maybe I'm not getting something about GnuPG and/or Mutt's
> interaction with GnuPG, then (Nope, not being sarcastic here). If I set
> this thing to verify all signatures, and I have my keyserver settings in
> place, every single key that I ve
* Matthew D. Fuller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 24. 2002 18:29]:
> Actually, I've found that this:
> if(/^Content-Type: text\/html/)
> to $MBOXDIR/crap
> catches more of my spam than any other of my off-the-cuff heuristics
> (I mean, like at factor of 2 more, and seemingly more than the rest
>
> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 17:36:28 -0600
> From: Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OT] html email
>
> On Jan 24, Matthew D. Fuller [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > Actually, I've found that this:
> > if(/^Content-Type: text\/html/)
> > to $MBOXDIR/crap
>
* Jeremy Blosser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 24. 2002 18:34]:
> On Jan 24, Brian Clark [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > OK, maybe I'm not getting something about GnuPG and/or Mutt's
> > interaction with GnuPG, then (Nope, not being sarcastic here). If
> > I set this thing to verify all signatures, an
* Anh Lai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 24. 2002 15:38]:
> how do i keep adding my signature when replying? I would like to add
> it only when composing a new messgae. Having my signature collect on
> the bottom gets annoying sometimes.
If you use vim, this is what I use in my .vimrc:
au BufEnter
* Brian Clark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 24. 2002 18:54]:
> But to make this semi-OT:
D'oh, make that `semi-On-Topic'
--
Brian Clark | Avoiding the general public since 1805!
Fingerprint: 07CE FA37 8DF6 A109 8119 076B B5A2 E5FB E4D0 C7C8
Stop searching forever. Happiness is unattainable.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> if I wanted to completely empty a mailbox?
"D." will delete ALL.
igor
- --
Uptime : 43 days, 16:25
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8UKFcxOY724kDbSARAoDUAJ47RQ9Mq
> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:42:05 -0500
> From: Brian Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OT] html email
>
> * Matthew D. Fuller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 24. 2002 18:29]:
> If it catches a friend, newletter, etc, I just add the sender's address
> to a file ca
Brian --
...and then Brian Clark said...
%
% * David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 24. 2002 10:00]:
%
% > ...and then Brian Clark said...
%
% > % I was trying to get something similar to work yesterday. No one
% > % finds it odd that one can't check a single signature? I've given
...
% > I thin
David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I seem to be the only one who likes percent, but if I used one of |:}#
> then apparently nobody would mind since mutt would already recognize it.
Hm.
% grep 'quote_regexp\|smiley' .muttrc
set quote_regexp="^([ \t]*>)+"
set smileys=">From "
;-(
Sam
Hi there,
I'd like to colllect feedback on an idea that's been on my mind for some
time now:
looks like there's just two MDA's in use: Procmail, and Maildrop. Both
have their fine (and not so fine) points, which I'll summarize briefly
(YMMV):
Procmail:
+ lots of prepackaged antispam filters
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 02:58:20AM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> looks like there's just two MDA's in use: Procmail, and Maildrop. Both
> have their fine (and not so fine) points, which I'll summarize briefly
> (YMMV):
Consider perl's Mail::Audit module.
--
rjbs
On Jan 24, Samuel Padgett [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I seem to be the only one who likes percent, but if I used one of |:}#
> > then apparently nobody would mind since mutt would already recognize it.
> % grep 'quote_regexp\|smiley' .muttrc
This message
On 25/01/02 Ricardo SIGNES did speaketh:
> Consider perl's Mail::Audit module.
I tried that for a while, but when I had 100 email in the queue, forking
100 copies of Perl hit my box a _lot_ harder than the equal number of procmail
instances. I'm not sure how good the process-space sharing is
On Jan 25, Roman Neuhauser [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Now, what bugs me about both of these programs: to the best of my
> knowledge, neither offers you a real programming language. This can be a
> plus, or a minus (YMMV), but imagine being able to write filters using a
> full-featured scripting
On 02:58 25 Jan 2002, Roman Neuhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| I'd like to colllect feedback on an idea that's been on my mind for some
| time now:
|
| looks like there's just two MDA's in use: Procmail, and Maildrop. Both
| have their fine (and not so fine) points, which I'll summarize brief
On Jan 24, Jeremy Blosser [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Jan 25, Roman Neuhauser [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > Now, what bugs me about both of these programs: to the best of my
> > knowledge, neither offers you a real programming language. This can be a
> > plus, or a minus (YMMV), but imagine b
On 21:26 24 Jan 2002, Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On 25/01/02 Ricardo SIGNES did speaketh:
| > Consider perl's Mail::Audit module.
|
| I tried that for a while, but when I had 100 email in the queue, forking
| 100 copies of Perl hit my box a _lot_ harder than the equal num
Sam --
...and then Samuel Padgett said...
%
% David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
%
% > I seem to be the only one who likes percent, but if I used one of |:}#
% > then apparently nobody would mind since mutt would already recognize it.
%
% Hm.
%
% % grep 'quote_regexp\|smiley' .muttrc
% set
Jeremy, et al --
...and then Jeremy Blosser said...
%
% On Jan 24, Samuel Padgett [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
% > David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
% > > I seem to be the only one who likes percent, but if I used one of |:}#
% > > then apparently nobody would mind since mutt would already rec
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 05:49:27PM +0100, Nick Wilson wrote:
> > 2. I got tired of explaining text-only MUAs to them only to receive
> > comments like, "I guess Unix isn't very good if it can't even
> > display different colors and fonts like my PC can. When are you
> > guys going to
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Roman Neuhauser thusly...
>
> Procmail:
...
> - quite resource-hungry (keeps the whole message in memory while
> processing it)
well, i get around 100-300 messages a day from various mailing lists
and it has not bothered me, resources wise, a bit o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Brian Clark blurted
> :0:
> * ^From.*pc-html-user@domain\.com
> /dev/null
>
> Save yourself from having to explain further. :-)
Hehe, yeah, that'd do it!
- --
Nick Wilson
Tel:+45 3325 0688
Fax:+45 3325 0677
Web:www.ex
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Roman Neuhauser blurted
> Like this?
>
> if(/^Content-Type: text\/html/ && hasaddr([EMAIL PROTECTED]))
> to $MBOXDIR/crap
>
> X-Warning: had a few beers.
Anyone got the equivelant Procmail recipe for dumpi
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Roman Neuhauser thusly...
>
> Procmail:
...
> is there something that you sorely lack in your favorite MDA?
one thing that i would want in procmail is the ability to mix and
match AND/OR conditions to my heart's content. currently, it's
possible to some deg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Will Yardley blurted
> i agree with recent posts about this list. this used to be one of the
> lists i enjoyed reading most since most people had good ettiquette
> (unlike many other mailing lists i'm on) and since it had a minimum of
Alas! Nick Wilson spake thus:
> Anyone got the equivelant Procmail recipe for dumping mail if it's
> text/html ot not addressed to you? I use this to get the latter:
>
> :0:
> * !(^[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> ~/Mail/Other/suspect
>
> Which works fine, adding the ability to weed out html would make it
Alas! David T-G spake thus:
> Funny, but my prompt really used to be > back in my early days.
Of course, good old Wintendo has always used the '>' character at the
end of the DOS prompt... and I dunno what shell you guys are using, but
mine uses $ for user and # for root... '%' doesn't enter into
101 - 128 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
