Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Nikola Petrov
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 05:34:13PM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * Nikola Petrov [12-21-12 16:24]: > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 03:45:06PM +, Chris Green wrote: > [...] > > > Yes (not the OP here though), however it has always seemed odd to me > > > that I can't get mutt to take me to all/a

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Chris Green
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 07:03:23AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 03:45:06PM +, Chris Green wrote: > > Yes (not the OP here though), however it has always seemed odd to me > > that I can't get mutt to take me to all/any mailboxes which have > > *unread* mail in them. I

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Chris Green
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 01:31:02PM +, Chris Green wrote: > On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 07:03:23AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 03:45:06PM +, Chris Green wrote: > > > > Just a quick grep through the docs reveals: > > > > When changing folders, Mutt fills the prompt

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Brandon Sandrowicz
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 03:45:06PM +, Chris Green wrote: > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 11:28:09PM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 02:01:47AM +0100, Marco wrote: > > > On 2012–12–20 Patrick Shanahan wrote: > > > > > > > You access the mail box and leave, then expect mutt t

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Chris Bannister
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 01:47:24PM +, Chris Green wrote: > > I have added:- > bindindex n next-unread-mailbox > > ... and now I can find new mail in all my (mbox) mailboxes without any > stupid requirements for setting access times or whatever to the files. > I always thought it sho

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Patrick Shanahan
* Chris Bannister [12-22-12 09:58]: > On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 01:47:24PM +, Chris Green wrote: > > > > I have added:- > > bindindex n next-unread-mailbox > > > > ... and now I can find new mail in all my (mbox) mailboxes without any > > stupid requirements for setting access times

Re: Sidebar not updated when in pager

2012-12-22 Thread Brandon Sandrowicz
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:46:37PM +0100, Marco wrote: > Hi, > > I'm not sure if this is the right list for patched versions of mutt. > I use the Debian version mutt-patched which includes the sidebar, > which is what my question is about. > > Whenever I display a message in the pager, the sideba

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Chris Green
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 03:41:58AM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 01:47:24PM +, Chris Green wrote: > > > > I have added:- > > bindindex n next-unread-mailbox > > > > ... and now I can find new mail in all my (mbox) mailboxes without any > > stupid requiremen

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Chris Green
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 10:08:25AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * Chris Bannister [12-22-12 09:58]: > > On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 01:47:24PM +, Chris Green wrote: > > > > > > I have added:- > > > bindindex n next-unread-mailbox > > > > > > ... and now I can find new mail in all m

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Patrick Shanahan
* Chris Green [12-22-12 12:14]: > Yes, I know I have hijacked 'n', I might change it but that doesn't > affect the argument about whether using next-unread-mailbox is better > than change-folder for seeing new mail. It is apparently not in *your* use case, but I have been using mutt since ~1998 a

New mails not updated in index view when pager open

2012-12-22 Thread Marco
On 2012–12–22 Brandon Sandrowicz wrote: > Took a look into the sidebar patch, and it redraws itself while in the > pager, but it seems to rely on Mutt's current functionality with respect > to updating mailbox info (buffy lists). So, if Mutt hasn't updated that > info, then the redraw doesn't chan

Mutt+Abook: questions about addresses and multiple addressees

2012-12-22 Thread leo
Hi mutters, I have started using mutt few days ago. I have two small problems with the relationship between mutt and abook. ::First question:: When I write an e-mail and I choose the addressee, abook automatically always insert into the field To (or Cc or Bcc) the name and the e-mail address (e

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Andre Klärner
Hi Patrick, On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 12:45:59PM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * Chris Green [12-22-12 12:14]: > > Yes, I know I have hijacked 'n', I might change it but that doesn't > > affect the argument about whether using next-unread-mailbox is better > > than change-folder for seeing new m

Re: Mutt+Abook: questions about addresses and multiple addressees

2012-12-22 Thread Andre Klärner
Hi Leo, On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 07:09:25PM +0100, leo wrote: > ::First question:: > When I write an e-mail and I choose the addressee, abook automatically > always insert into the field To (or Cc or Bcc) the name and the e-mail > address (example: name surname . I would like > that in the field To

Re: Mutt+Abook: questions about addresses and multiple addressees

2012-12-22 Thread Christoph Möbius
> ::Second question:: I'm not able to select more than one addressee in a single > field (To or Cc or Bcc). Are there any key bindings or something like this to > do that? in muttrc I have set query_command = "abook --mutt-query '%s'" typing Q in the index lets you query names and addresses ( C-a

Re: Jump to next mailbox with unread mail

2012-12-22 Thread Patrick Shanahan
* Andre Klärner [12-22-12 14:12]: [...] > if you do know where this exactly comes from please tell me. I am still no > getting why it is behaving the way it is - from my point of view I think > the browser-view should be usable with the limit functionality. > > Can you tell me what way to find

Re: Mutt+Abook: questions about addresses and multiple addressees

2012-12-22 Thread Marco
On 2012–12–22 Andre Klärner wrote: > Well, from the manpage of abook I guess that is not possible. But from my > perspective it is the right way to do it as it is. I think of it as a > properly written address is better than just the technical declaration of > the receipient (like on an official i