Hi,
I use the setting “edit_headers” resulting in the headers being
displayed in my editor when I creating a message. Is there a way to
customise which headers are being displayed? I never change the
“Reply-To:” header, for instance, and I'd like to remove it.
Marco
signature.asc
Description: D
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 04:26:32PM +0100, Marco wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use the setting “edit_headers” resulting in the headers being
> displayed in my editor when I creating a message. Is there a way to
> customise which headers are being displayed? I never change the
> “Reply-To:” header, for instanc
On 2013–02–08 Suvayu Ali wrote:
> I use a combination of ignore and unignore to choose which headers I see
Ignore and unignore control the headers displayed in the pager and
not the ones shown in the editor, if I'm not mistaken. Does this
work for you?
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital
Hi.
(For those deeply offended by manifestations of html in emails,
please look away now).
I mainly receive email from non-technical people. Recently,
while in the chaos ahead of a deadline I missed some
important email where answers to my questions where inserted
inline in a red color.
I have n
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:19:53PM +0100, Marco wrote:
> On 2013–02–08 Suvayu Ali wrote:
>
> > I use a combination of ignore and unignore to choose which headers I see
>
> Ignore and unignore control the headers displayed in the pager and
> not the ones shown in the editor, if I'm not mistaken. D
I'm trying to build mutt with gcc 3.2.3 on an old Solaris 8 box.
I'm building with:
--with-libiconv-prefix=/software/stow/libiconv-1.14
(I tried with libiconv 1.9.1 first, but got the same error, so tried upgrading)
./configure gives me:
checking whether iconv.h defines iconv_t... yes
checking
Also, if it matters, mutt 1.5.11 definitely built successfully (with
iconv), though since I didn't install it and don't have the
config.status from the old install, I don't know exactly how it was
built.
w
On another system, I can get past the iconv errors in configure.
But both with ncurses 5.2 and the builtin Solaris ncurses, I'm getting:
gcc -Wall -pedantic -Wno-long-long -g -O2 -L/software/stow/openssl-0.9.7d/lib
-L/software/stow/libiconv-1.9.1/lib -o mutt addrbook.o alias.o attach.o
base64
Found some stuff in:
http://compgroups.net/comp.unix.solaris/mutt-1.5-compile-help-solaris-9/439938
and got a little further
Now bailing on:
Undefined first referenced
symbol in file
key_defined keymap.o
Which I think has
I was able to get it to build, after upgrading ncurses. Install failed
until I upgraded autoconf (which in turn required a newer m4).
w
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 02:39:46PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
I was able to get it to build, after upgrading ncurses. Install failed
until I upgraded autoconf (which in turn required a newer m4).
Glad you figured that out.
FYI, there are nightly snapshots here
http://dev.mutt.org/nightlies/
w
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 11:46:45PM +, Michael Elkins wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 02:39:46PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
> > I was able to get it to build, after upgrading ncurses. Install failed
> > until I upgraded autoconf (which in turn required a newer m4).
>
> Glad you figured that o
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 03:48:33PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
I noticed some discussion about that. Somehow, though, I had assumed
that the nighlies would still need those tools compared to the current
"official" dev snapshot. In any event, seems to be working now.
They are built using the same
Incoming from Michael Elkins:
>
> FYI, there are nightly snapshots here http://dev.mutt.org/nightlies/
> which avoid the need to have the developer toolchain installed.
Michael, kind of off topic, I know, but why would you want to
discourage people from learning the developer toolchain? Rolling
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:30:03PM -0700, s. keeling wrote:
> Incoming from Michael Elkins:
> > FYI, there are nightly snapshots here http://dev.mutt.org/nightlies/
> > which avoid the need to have the developer toolchain installed.
>
> Michael, kind of off topic, I know, but why would you want t
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 04:46:28PM -0800, Will Yardley wrote:
I think the point is that minimizing the build dependencies for people
who aren't developers should reduce build problems quite a bit.
In this case it was a practical matter where the user wanted to
build Mutt itself, but had auto*
If at all possible I'd like to see the Subject: line for this list
updated from...
Subject: ...thread...
...to...
Subject: [mutt-users] ...thread...
I'm aware mail filters are readily available to some.
I'm suggesting it because the prefixed subject line model is very prevalent
these days, particu
Incoming from grarpamp:
> If at all possible I'd like to see the Subject: line for this list
> updated from...
> Subject: ...thread...
> ...to...
> Subject: [mutt-users] ...thread...
If you can use something like procmail or mailfilter (or imapfilter?
maybe; I'm still researching that), you may be
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:17:26PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> If at all possible I'd like to see the Subject: line for this list
> updated from...
> Subject: ...thread...
> ...to...
> Subject: [mutt-users] ...thread...
None for me, thanks.
> I'm aware mail filters are readily available to some. I'
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 09:11:55PM -0700, s. keeling wrote:
> Incoming from grarpamp:
> > If at all possible I'd like to see the Subject: line for this list
> > updated from...
> > Subject: ...thread...
> > ...to...
> > Subject: [mutt-users] ...thread...
>
> If you can use something like procmail
Few things are 'absolute', trade offs are often involved.
Just as I might suggest maildrop over procmail, others
might suggest bashing their mail over the server wire,
or sieving it, instead of downloading it and filtering it locally.
As an occaisional subscriber with filter in hand, I recuse mysel
Incoming from Derek Martin:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 09:11:55PM -0700, s. keeling wrote:
> > Incoming from grarpamp:
> > > If at all possible I'd like to see the Subject: line for this list
> > > updated from...
> > > Subject: ...thread...
> > > ...to...
> > > Subject: [mutt-users] ...thread...
>
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:17:26PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> If at all possible I'd like to see the Subject: line for this list
> updated from...
> Subject: ...thread...
> ...to...
> Subject: [mutt-users] ...thread...
> I'm aware mail filters are readily available to some. I'm suggesting
> it be
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 11:02:12PM -0700, s. keeling wrote:
> I don't know why he wants to do it; not my problem.
Yes, actually, you do:
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:17:26PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> Partly also to limit the needed customizations and header
> decipherment work to integrate new lis
> assume he's got a reason for wanting it
Maybe I'm lazy [2], or temporarily stuck in a crappy UI,
or to make the list friendlier to potential converts from Bill's
land of the GUI, or any number of things.
> I'm a sysadmin.
Or maybe I want to give those of us admins [1] who've mastered
filtering
On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 01:48:33AM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> [1] Equating use of mutt with unix admin is not unreasonable ;-)
Yes it is. Probably far less than half the people who use mutt are
sysadmins. They're much more likely to be programmers.
[Laziness]
> [2] Another fine trait of [1].
On
> better tools. I've been here for nearly 15 years, and the arguments
Or maybe I've been here for over 20 and am forgetting this same wisdom
I already learned and am beginning to lose the good fight against the Borg.
EOF
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:17:26PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> If at all possible I'd like to see the Subject: line for this list
> updated from...
> Subject: ...thread...
> ...to...
> Subject: [mutt-users] ...thread...
Ugh. Please, no.
There are much better ways to filter messages. Here's my strate
28 matches
Mail list logo
