On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Daniel Eisenbud wrote:
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 22:00:24 -0800
> From: Daniel Eisenbud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Russell Van Tassell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Mutt "runs aways" when it loses tty
>
> Can yo
On Mon, 5 Apr 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 16:27:12 +0200
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: mutt-users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Stripping signature on replies
>
> Hi there,
>
> how can i have the part of a message after the `--' automatically removed when
> rep
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Tony Rose wrote:
> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 11:14:56 -0500 (EST)
> From: Tony Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Pine Discussion Forum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Pine Alternatives ???
>
>[...]
>
> Is there a GUI program that will authenticate at the login that would
> repla
This really should be on the Procmail list (send a request to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]), but... so far, I think
everyone's not right...
If you're trying to use procmail to filter everything on this list in
to a foler, you to go for a header that the list software will
set for every message it sends o
Trying to compile Mutt 0.95.4i on Solaris 2.5.1 I noticed the
following... other than that, it seemed to have compiled cleanly...
-- begin
make all-recursive
Making all in doc
make html
sgml2html manual
sh: sgml2html: not found
*** Error code 1
make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `manua
Oops... also forgot the one warning seen during the compile... Solaris
2.5.1 (Sun4c) with GCC 2.7.2.3.
-- begin
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H=1 -Wall -pedantic -g -O2 -D_GEN_CHARSETS -c parse_i18n.c
parse_i18n.c: In function `main':
parse_i18n.c:347: warning: implicit declaration of function `snprintf'
I would appear as if Mutt 0.95.4i will "run away" on a Solaris 2.5.1
machine if the terminal disappears from it (like a couple of other
well-known Solaris tools). Instead of receiving the HUP from the
parent shell, the process gets backgrounded and attached to init where
it drives the CPU load u
On Mon, Apr 12, 1999 at 02:45:22PM -0700, rex wrote:
> It's fairly common for ISPs to put mail addressed to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] into username's mailbox with the "+whatever"
> intact. This is a handy feature for filtering, seeing who's selling
> your email addy, etc. In effect, you've got as many m
Stupid question: how the heck do I "unlimit" a limit command? Normally, I tend
to like to limit message down to a certain pattern and view those messages
(to make sure I've gotten it right) and then perform a specific operation on all
of those messages (eg. save them to a file or folder after
On Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 06:46:49PM +0200, Stefan `Sec` Zehl wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 08:54:27AM -0700, Russell Van Tassell wrote:
> >
> > Stupid question: how the heck do I "unlimit" a limit command?
> > [...]
>
> You can use any of these pattern
On Sat, May 01, 1999 at 02:58:17AM +0200, Stefan `Sec` Zehl wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 05:15:09PM -0700, Russell Van Tassell wrote:
> [..]
> > set signature="/usr/bin/cat /usr/home/russell/.signature |"
> >
> > However, if you wanted to extend that
Ok, I know this is in the online manual but it's a bit ambiguous... it
basically says that "Hooks that act upon messages re evaluated in a
slightly different manner" (than anything else in the config file, I
guess). That statement is also followed with an incomplete sentence
making the whole thi
On Sun, May 09, 1999 at 09:09:38PM +0200, Steve Crane wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Pretty much since I joined this list I have had this problem but it
> seems to have become worse of late.
>
> Althought most messages to the list have [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the To
> header, there are a number that don't.
On Sun, May 30, 1999 at 11:33:35AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Quoting our friend --> Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > There is some sort of convention that .sigs are separated from the body
> > by "-- " (dash dash space), and that .sigs should not be longer than
> > 4 lines.
>
>
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 09:00:54PM +0200, Marco Goetze wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14 1999, at 14:45 -0400, David Thorburn-Gundlach wrote:
> >I wanted to shoot a message to someone for analysis, so I carefully
> >set mime_fwd and then selected 'f'orward from the index. Imagine my
> >surprise when he ask
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 12:15:51PM +0200, Lex Chive wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Christian Stigen Larsen wrote:
> > P.S. What's the deal with version 2.6.3i of PGP ? Why
> > are a lot of people using this version instead
> > of the 5 and 5.5 versions ?
>
> Because
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:10:36AM -0500, Tim Walberg wrote:
> [No MIME encapsulation through gateway to work]
>
> Is this possibly something that Mutt is doing (i.e. a
> relatively new feature that I haven't yet seen the documentation
> on), or is it more likely something our (yuck!) Exchange
>
retty sure). But here's some examples...
# Here's the default
send-hook . \
'set signature="/usr/home/russell/.sigs/bin/rsig.pl quotes |"'
$ Here's what happens when I use this account to send mail "from/to loosenut"
send-hook loo
I'm so used to seeing Mutt compile cleanly, I figured I'd share the
following warnings during the last compile... (reformated for read-
ability, of course)
SunOS 5.5.1 Generic_103640-18 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-1
gcc version 2.8.1
gcc -DSHAREDIR=\"/usr/local/share/mutt\" -DSYSCONF
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 09:51:27PM +0200, Frederick Page wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> got the latest from www.mutt.org and was trying to compile it, but as
> in pre1, the same error persists:
>
> /usr/src/mutt-1.0pre2-us# /usr/src/mutt-1.0pre2-us/configure
> creating cache ./config.cache
> checkin
On Fri, Sep 03, 1999 at 01:09:11AM +0200, Frederick Page wrote:
> >(output from it might also be helpful, here... config.guess
> >specifically seems to run it with -m, -r, -s and -v (at different
> >times).
>
> Quoting from "man uname":
>
> If the -a option is given, the selected information i
Ok... I'm probably just missing something simple, here... but how do you
forward a message to someone and include FULL headers (such as you would
do for forwarding spam messages to a service provider)?
Russell
--
Russell M. Van Tassell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Nov 10, 1999 at 01:25:52PM +, Sean Rima wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> Seriously OT but maybe not. I went on holiday and left vacation to answer my
> mail, however, it should not send any mail back to the list.
Ummm... simply put, use procmail/formail... you'll have less problems
with it. (
On Wed, Nov 10, 1999 at 09:33:56PM +, Sean Rima wrote:
> > > [Did 'vacation' cause me to get bounced off the list?]
> >
> > Ummm... simply put, use procmail/formail... you'll have less problems
> > with it. (there are decent examples of making this work in the
> > procmailex man page)
>
> Th
24 matches
Mail list logo
