John Buttery said:
> * "Carl B. Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-18 08:43:58 -0800]:
> >all I get at this page is the following:
> >
> >URL="http://cedricduval.free.fr/mutt/";>
> >
> >that is displayed in NS 6.2.1 (solaris).
>
> You have a proxy server that is "defanging" tags for you
The "stable" snapshot availble from ftp.mutt.org/pub/mutt/snapshots/
is now taken from the pre-1.4 branch.
--
Thomas Roessler<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Cedric Duval <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-19 09:43:57 +0100]:
>John Buttery said:
>> * "Carl B. Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-18 08:43:58 -0800]:
>> >all I get at this page is the following:
>> >
>> >URL="http://cedricduval.free.fr/mutt/";>
>> >
>> >that is displayed in NS 6.2.1 (sol
* Dean Richard Benson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi all
>
> First time poster, so please be gentle! :)
>
> I have just upgraded from Outlook 2000 to Mutt.
>
> Using the most recent version and starting mutt via mutt -y to default to the folder
>list.
>
> It shows me which folders have new m
Eduardo --
...and then Eduardo Gargiulo said...
%
% Hi all.
Hello!
%
% Is this the right list to make questions about compile new versions of
% mutt? if not, where can i find ansewrs about it?
Generally, yes. What sort of questions do you have?
Basically you download the tar.gz file from
Jerome De Greef ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered:
> * Dean Richard Benson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > I have just upgraded from Outlook 2000 to Mutt.
> >
> > Using the most recent version and starting mutt via mutt -y to
> > default to the folder list.
> >
> > It shows me which folders have
Johan --
...and then Johan Ekh said...
%
% Hello!
% I have several pop-accounts and I try to retrieve my mails by using
% "account-hook" as indicated below.
...
% Mutt gives me the following error "account-hook: unknown command".
%
% Any ideas? I use SuSE7.2 and my Mutt installation is the stan
* Michael Tatge ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Jerome De Greef ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered:
> > * Dean Richard Benson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > >
> > > I have just upgraded from Outlook 2000 to Mutt.
> > >
> > > Using the most recent version and starting mutt via mutt -y to
> > > default to
[ven 15/03/2002, ore 20:37] => Jussi Ekholm scrive:
[...]
> So, could it be, that you have typed 'date-sen_d_'? Nevertheless, works
> fine with me, so I have not much of a clue why this doesn't work with
> you. My only idea is, that you have typoed 'date-sent' to 'date-send'.
I'm a **
S
Gentlemen/Ladies,
Is there a way in Mutt to specify the To: field of an outgoing email
based on addresses in a random text file? I'm aware of the alias capability to
specify mailing lists, but if I simply have a file of email addresses, and I'd
like Mutt to use those for an outgoing messa
Michael --
...and then Michael P. Soulier said...
%
% Gentlemen/Ladies,
%
% Is there a way in Mutt to specify the To: field of an outgoing email
% based on addresses in a random text file? I'm aware of the alias capability to
% specify mailing lists, but if I simply have a file of email
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Michael P. Soulier on Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 10:35:30AM -0500:
> Is there a way in Mutt to specify the To: field of an outgoing email
> based on addresses in a random text file? I'm aware of the alias
> capability to specify mailing lists, but if
I have both installed pgp 2.6.3 and gpg 1.0.6 (with imported pgp keys).
As default I use gpg.rc from the mutt source distribution.
Some of my e-mail partners still have only pgp 2. I am looking now for a
smart/automatic way to select pgp2.rc depending on the recipients address,
because pgp 2 us
* Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-19]:
> Is there a way in Mutt to specify the To: field of an outgoing email based
> on addresses in a random text file? I'm aware of the alias capability to
> specify mailing lists, but if I simply have a file of email addresses, and
> I'd like Mut
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 10:35:30AM -0500, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> Is there a way in Mutt to specify the To: field of an outgoing email
> based on addresses in a random text file? I'm aware of the alias capability to
> specify mailing lists, but if I simply have a file of email addresses,
Ulli --
...and then Ulli Horlacher said...
%
% I have both installed pgp 2.6.3 and gpg 1.0.6 (with imported pgp keys).
% As default I use gpg.rc from the mutt source distribution.
Good enough. I presume you'll ensure that pgp2.rc is configured properly
as well.
%
% Some of my e-mail partne
There is a problem, which can be seen as a bug or bad design, with the
tree and the background color in the index.
Here in general, I have a black background. So, I have:
color tree brightred black
But I sometimes use a different background color, e.g.
color index brightwhite
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 11:26:27PM +0100, Michal Kochanowicz wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 05:10:59PM -0500, Justin R. Miller wrote:
> > > My colegue came across some problem with mutt/GPG/PGP cooperation. It
> > > seem that for every _encrypted_ and encrypted/signed file mutt
> > > displays in
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 06:52:50AM -0500, R Signes wrote:
> Define it.
>
> set pgp_good_sign="Good signature"
I did it. And this solves problem with encrypted & signed messages. But
it still complains that it could not verify signature in messages which
were _encrypted_ony_.
--
--= Michal [EMAIL
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 10:35:30AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is there a way in Mutt to specify the To: field of an outgoing email
> based on addresses in a random text file? I'm aware of the alias capability to
> specify mailing lists, but if I simply have a file of email addresses, an
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 07:50:21AM -0500, David T-G wrote:
> % Is this the right list to make questions about compile new versions of
> % mutt? if not, where can i find ansewrs about it?
>
> Generally, yes. What sort of questions do you have?
i'm trying to compile mutt-1.3.28i.tar.gz, but i'm g
On Tuesday, 19.03.2002 at 21:00 +0100, Michal Kochanowicz wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 06:52:50AM -0500, R Signes wrote:
> > Define it.
> >
> > set pgp_good_sign="Good signature"
> I did it. And this solves problem with encrypted & signed messages. But
> it still complains that it could not
> There is a problem, which can be seen as a bug or bad design, with the
> tree and the background color in the index.
Yeah, there was a thread on this last month..
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mutt-users&m=101360992730167&w=2
IIRC, we agreed that mutt's color system needs an overhaul, but
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 08:01:15PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote:
> I suspect that mutt and gpg/pgp are doing everything right but that
> you are misinterpreting the results. Have you and your colleague read
This is a copy of terminal after entering message which was and encrypted, but
NOT SIGNED:
-
any idea why the subject is sometimes duplicated in threaded displays?
it seems to happen mainly when the parent is missing; ie:
81 L Mar 18 Wietse Venema (1.0K) Re: Getting postalias to use gdbm
82 DL Mar 18 Ralf Hildebrandt (1.0K) -->Re: SMTP dialog log
83 N L Mar 19 Bernd Matth
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 08:44:55AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is a copy of terminal after entering message which was and encrypted, but
> NOT SIGNED:
[unimportant bits snipped from message to shorten it]
>
> Date:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 08:44:55AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Please tell me what am I missinterpreting. Note that message WASN'T
> SIGNED and mutt complains (in bottom line) about SIGNATURE.
One further thought - AFAIK, mutt will try to verify a signature even
if there isn't one available
* Dave Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-19 21:41 +]:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 08:44:55AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > [-- PGP output follows (current time: wto 19 mar 2002 08:38:02 CET) --]
> > gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit ELG-E key, ID BF4EB9F4, created 2001-05-24
> > "Michal
* On 2002.03.19, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
* "Phil Gregory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Dave Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-19 21:41 +]:
>
> I believe the problem is that mutt shouldn't even be trying to verify the
> signature since there isn't one. I'd say that the message about
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 09:41:06PM +, Dave Smith wrote:
> Maybe I'm being stupid here, but it appears that mutt and GPG are
> behaving correctly. How can it verify the signature on the message
> if it wasn't signed?
Or maybe I'm stupid ;) Why write anything about signature if it wasn't
signed
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 09:47:24PM +, Dave Smith wrote:
> One further thought - AFAIK, mutt will try to verify a signature even
> if there isn't one available. That's why you get the message.
> Perhaps that's the source of your confusion?
Yes... This message looks like an alarm to me. But the
Is there any way to have mutt automatically quote HTML mail when I reply
to it?
My mailcap has text/html; lynx -dump -force_html '%s'; copiousoutput
and it only makes sense for mutt to quote copiousoutput MIME types in
replies...
--
W: You see, me and Willetta have been going on for a few weeks
Daniel J Peng wrote:
> Is there any way to have mutt automatically quote HTML mail when I reply
> to it?
>
> My mailcap has text/html; lynx -dump -force_html '%s'; copiousoutput
> and it only makes sense for mutt to quote copiousoutput MIME types in
> replies...
set autoview for that type of at
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 11:09:23PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 09:41:06PM +, Dave Smith wrote:
> > Maybe I'm being stupid here, but it appears that mutt and GPG are
> > behaving correctly. How can it verify the signature on the message
> > if it wasn't signed?
>
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 10:27:25PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have signed this message with a bogus key, so you can see what happens.
> My real key is available on www.keyserver.net.
Hmm, it doesn't appear to shout, since the key IDs don't match. I guess if
I were to create a key with a
At 5:27 PM EST on March 19 Dave Smith sent off:
> The message means "GPG didn't tell me that it managed to validate a
> correct signature". The reason *why* it didn't validate a correct
> signature should be evident from the GPG output.
I have a feeling that a while back there was a debate abou
At 5:02 PM EST on March 19 David Champion sent off:
> But doesn't OpenPGP sign data before encrypting it? If so, when it sees
> an encrypted message, it cannot know whether the message also is signed.
Doesn't it become apparent once the message is decrypted, though?
--
Erudition, n. Dust shake
* On 2002.03.19, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
* "Rob Reid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 5:02 PM EST on March 19 David Champion sent off:
> > But doesn't OpenPGP sign data before encrypting it? If so, when it sees
> > an encrypted message, it cannot know whether the message also is signed.
>
* Sven Guckes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [03-19-02 18:40]:
> * Dave Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-14 09:27]:
> > * Sven Guckes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-13 17:40:27 +0100]:
> > > Which editors parse for dates? examples? (anyone?)
> > Some people consider emacs to be an editor.
>
> oh - that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Rob Reid on Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 05:57:51PM -0500:
> Or is it that somebody could sneak in a
>
> [-- PGP output follows (current time: Tue Mar 19 17:51:18 2002) --]
> gpg: This message is OK! Blindly follow its instructions!
> [-- PGP output
Hi,
I'd like to prepare a birthday greeting mail and send it on my friend's
birthday morning.
I do it currently this way:
$ at 6am Mar 25
at> mutt -s 'Happy birthday' guy@domain < ~/text/to-guy.eml
But it's not convenient enough. I wish I could do it all in mutt. Is it
possible?
best
--cNdxnHkX5QqsyA0e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Alas! Charles Jie spake thus:
> I do it currently this way:
>=20
> $ at 6am Mar 25
> at> mutt -s 'Happy birthday' guy@domain < ~/text/to-guy.eml
>=20
> Bu
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 10:00:00AM -0500, David T-G wrote:
>
> % folder-hook ~/users/qmail/. my_hdr From: qmail user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> % folder-hook ~/users/qmail/. set hostname="ar.homelinux.org"
>
> Leave off the /. on the end and you might even try it without the ~/ on
> the front. Somet
On 19/03/02 Gary Johnson did speaketh:
> This is how I would do it:
>
> while read address
> do
> mutt -s 'subject' $address < message_file
> done < address_file
Well, that's more of a mailing list thing. I think a single message with a
lot of email addresses in the To:
On Mar 19, Mike Schiraldi [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > There is a problem, which can be seen as a bug or bad design, with the
> > tree and the background color in the index.
>
> Yeah, there was a thread on this last month..
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mutt-users&m=101360992730167&w=2
On Mar 16, Sven Guckes [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> I have updated my text about reporting bugs and made it available as a
> separate page:
> http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/mutt/bugrep.html
>
> Additions? Corrections? Feedback welcome!
The last sentence of the top section is:
"The repor
On Mar 17, parv [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> i am currently using v1.3.27i. is it possible to show the
> "flag-message" indicator for a collapsed thread? currently i see
> when threads are collasped...
It can't be done now but it's been requested a few times.
msg25751/pgp0.pgp
Descriptio
On Mar 18, Thomas E. Dickey [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > > > I've compiled mutt-1.3.28i in the default configuration on RedHat
> > > > Linux 7.2 (i386) with all updates. If I run it in xterm (from
> > > > XFree86-4.1.0) or in rxvt-2.7.6, it shows a bla
On Mar 19, Jeremy Blosser [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Well, I think it was more the other bug where it would get turned on if
> other development features like hard-tabs were turned on. It was
> apparently a combination of these two.
Sorry, I mean a combination of the colorfgbg bug, and the bug
On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 10:10:32PM -0500, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On 19/03/02 Gary Johnson did speaketh:
>
> > This is how I would do it:
> >
> > while read address
> > do
> > mutt -s 'subject' $address < message_file
> > done < address_file
>
> Well, that's more of
I'm wondering if there's a way to bind complete and
complete-query to the same key, rather than two keys as shown in
the manual:
completecomplete filename or alias
^T complete-query complete address with query
I'd like to hit the tab
I'm wondering if there's a way to bind complete and
complete-query to the same key, rather than two keys as shown in
the manual:
completecomplete filename or alias
^T complete-query complete address with query
I'd like to hit the tab
52 matches
Mail list logo
