Hi,
When I open some mailbox I get to the index window, and the 'cursor' is
positioned on the first message (which is the oldest one). How can I tell mutt
to automatically go to the last message? (now I have to type G to do that).
Thanks for the tip. I now use the following, which works:
folder-hook . push "G"
quite simple ;) - that's what I like about mutt.
(It is slower then pine, though, when opening folders..)
> Christoph Bugel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
>
Did you also check the mail archive link from mutt.org?
I noticed there are two: one to egroups and another on mutt.org
> Greetings mutt friends,
>
> Can anyone help me find some mutt-user lore of old? The egroups
> archive goes back to mid 1998, but I'm looking for some messages I
> would h
I use `my_hdr', but `set from' seems to be more straightforward.. I also think
it is better to change the From: field, and not the reply-to: field. (some
people/mailers seem to ignore that). The reply-to method is a work-around. I
had to use that work-around for some time, because my sendmail
I also wanted to use my arrow keys to navigate through folders.
(like I did in pine.) what I have now is:
macro index "?"
this binds the key to get you to the change-folder menu, f you are in
the message index. (I think you need the mailboxes command to tell mutt which
folders you have)
also
I do it like this:
Go to the attachements screen (press 'v'); Go to the relevant
attachement (I guess you can 'tag' them if you want multiple
attachements, with 't'), then press on the reply key or forward ('f' or
'r' or 'g')
On Wed 2001-01-24, Brian Galbraith wrote:
> Hi Folks
> I am a new use
I am using mutt 1.4, and it sometimes gets the threads wrong.
The symptom is that some messages of a thread wil appear in an entirely
unrelated thread..
My observation is that if someone with mutt-1.2.5 replies to a message by user1,
it generates the following header:
In-Reply-To: <"from user1"@
On 2002-06-11, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Christoph Bugel [02-06-11 22:21:30 +0200] wrote:
> > My observation is that if someone with mutt-1.2.5 replies
> > to a message by user1, it generates the following header:
>
> > In-Reply-To: <"from user1&quo
On 2002-06-12, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> * Christoph Bugel [02-06-12 11:23:05 +0200] wrote:
> > On 2002-06-11, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> > > * Christoph Bugel [02-06-11 22:21:30 +0200] wrote:
[...]
> > still, I thought that *anything* after the In-Reply-To: is
> > supposed
On 2002-06-12, Alain Bench wrote:
[...]
> Calm down! ;-) Situation is not *so* critical:
ok ;-)
> First: many readers use more "References:" than "In-Reply-To:" to
> show threads, and Mutt 1.2.5 posts this field cleanly.
>
> Second: trash loaded IRT field is not a problem of Mutt 1.
On 2002-06-13, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Christoph Bugel [02-06-13 09:29:54 +0200] wrote:
> > On 2002-06-12, Alain Bench wrote:
>
> > > set in_reply_to="%i"
>
> > I still don't understand what's going on though. I even
> > susp
On 2002-06-13, Alain Bench wrote:
> Hello Christoph,
>
> On Thursday, June 13, 2002 at 10:23:01 AM +0300, Christoph Bugel wrote:
>
> > I found that my local mbox files contain lots of headers of the form
> > In-reply-to: <"from userxyz"@host>
>
On 2002-06-13, Alain Bench wrote:
[...]
> By the way Mutt 1.4 shows me these 2 mails in the right thread, just
> below the parent, but with a "`-?->" as if there was a missing mail in
> between.
I noticed that depending on how many other messages you have (and by which
authors) mutt will put
On 2002-06-13, Daniel Eisenbud wrote:
> Currently, mutt uses the following heuristic: if there is just an
> in-reply-to header, mutt uses all the message-ids that it can find
> there, until it finds a message that's actually in the mailbox. If
> there's just a references header, it does the same
14 matches
Mail list logo
