[33;1m[-- PGP output follows (current time: Wed Sep 2 11:15:01 2015) --][0m
gpg: Signature made Wed Aug 19 22:17:44 2015 CEST using RSA key ID 0312C726
gpg: Good signature from "mwnx "
Primary key fingerprint: AEC9 554B 07BD F60D 75A3 AF6A 44E8 E4D4 0312 C726
[33;1m[-- End of PGP output --][0
Hi, all
I asked some question yesterday about how to redefine the same key
using a macro. Subject title was:
[Macro] Redefine the same key ( key)
Finally I had found a way to make it work "almost" as expected:
my not working old macro needed sequence to be enclosed in single
quotes instead in do
I have a FastMail account and have set up a macro to send messages to
the Archive:
macro index,pager y "Archive" "Archive"
However when I do this and then check in the webmail they are not in the
Archive (and not in the Inbox). Where are they going?
I'm using FastMail with mutt, though I'm not using macros to save messages. I'm not sure
what your other config looks like, so I'm not sure how useful this will be to you. I'll
post below my FastMail-specific muttrc settings for reference, but I'm just using the
default "s" keybinding to (optio
On 2015-09-02 08:19 -0400, Matthew Phillips wrote:
> I have a FastMail account and have set up a macro to send messages to
> the Archive:
>
> macro index,pager y "Archive" "Archive"
>
> However when I do this and then check in the webmail they are not in the
> Archive (and not in the Inbox). Wh
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 08:06:24AM -0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> On 2015-09-02 08:19 -0400, Matthew Phillips wrote:
>
> > I have a FastMail account and have set up a macro to send messages to
> > the Archive:
> >
> > macro index,pager y "Archive" "Archive"
> >
> > However when I do this and then
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 04:49:16PM +0200, bastian-muttu...@t6l.de wrote:
> The mutt homepage [1] links to the mutt mailing list archives for -users
> [2] and -dev [3]. Both are not reachable (at least right now).
Thanks for the report, we've just updated the website.
--
Kevin J. McCarthy
GPG Fi
I do not have a lot of use for encrypting my mail, but it is
(sometimes) interesting to look at the signatures of signed mail on
the lists - and using signed git tags for anything which I release
sounds like a good idea.
>From time to time I have seen mails on lkml which gpg reports as
BADSIG, but
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 06:47:53PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> I do not have a lot of use for encrypting my mail, but it is
> (sometimes) interesting to look at the signatures of signed mail on
> the lists - and using signed git tags for anything which I release
> sounds like a good idea.
>
Snippi
On 2015-09-02 19:50 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> Using 1.5.23, I looked at signed mails on this list. That showed my
> theory is wrong : the mail from Brendan Cully announcing 1.5.24 has
> the non =-=-= boundary with inline disposition but is good, whereas
> that from Kevin J. McCarthy is similar b
On 02Sep2015 11:31, mwnx wrote, with embedded ANSI escapes:
^[[33;1m[-- PGP output follows (current time: Wed Sep 2 11:15:01 2015) --]^[[0m
gpg: Signature made Wed Aug 19 22:17:44 2015 CEST using RSA key ID 0312C726
gpg: Good signature from "mwnx "
Primary key fingerprint: AEC9 554B 07BD F60D 7
11 matches
Mail list logo
