Re: ISO cancel option in quit prompt from send-message
On Tue, 08 Oct 2002 at 06:10:11PM -0700, Michael Elkins wrote: Rob Reid wrote: It's what the one true editor uses, but you're right, C-g should be a hard-coded addition to the ? menu, right at the top. Technically, control-G is not a valid command in that context. It only works inside of prompts, and there is no help menu available when using the line-editor. It would be misleading to put it elsewhere. Rather a large number of people have trouble discovering it and it's an essential command. IMHO, it ought to be easier to find. Many thanks to you and the other developers for creating a great MUA. Regards, -rex
Reading news with Mutt (was: reply-to alternatives)
On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 at 07:09:37PM +0200, Hanspeter Roth wrote: Which newsreader is most similar to mutt? Mutt with a NNTP patch. Here's one that doesn't require any external programs: http://www.ing.umu.se/~connor/programs/mutt.html Regards, -rex -- The actual user of the PC -- someone who can do anything they want -- is the enemy. - David Aucsmith, Intel security http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/1999/8/ns-7129.html
make install fails after ./config --with-mixmaster
Trying to build mutt 1.4 with mixmaster support fails under SuSE 8.0: ./configure --with-mixmaster [...] make install [...] compose.c: In function `mutt_compose_menu': compose.c:1205: `OP_COMPOSE_MIX' undeclared (first use in this function) compose.c:1205: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once compose.c:1205: for each function it appears in.) make[1]: *** [compose.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/mutt-1.4' make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 It works without the --with-mixmaster option. Any suggestions? Thanks, -rex
Mutt support for mixmaster 2.9bxx
Why doesn't mutt support mixmaster 2.9bxx? The mutt manual says: Mixmaster support in mutt is for mixmaster version 2.04 (beta 45 appears to be the latest) and 2.03. It does not support earlier versions or the later so-called version 3 betas, of which the latest appears to be called 2.9b23. The latest release is 2.9b38 (10-Sep-2002), and the 2.9bxx series has been under development since 1998, with the first public release in 1999. Isn't it past time to support it? There is a patch for 2.9b23 at http://lacebark.ntu.edu.au/mutt.html and also a patch for mutt 1.3.10 to use mixmaster nyms, but will they work with 2.9b38 and mutt 1.4? Thanks, -rex
Re: Mysteriously purged emails
On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 02:00:48PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm using NFS on the box, but not for the email spools. Those are all resident on local harddrives on the computer. I'm sure you've looked, but for completeness: if you inadventently answer y to Mutt's first prompt when exiting, it will move all read mail from /usr/spool/mail/your_username to the file mbox set in .muttrc. The default is ~/mbox. The next time Mutt is started it will appear that all the read mail is lost (don't ask me how I know), but it's in mbox. HTH, -rex -- The actual user of the PC -- someone who can do anything they want -- is the enemy. - David Aucsmith, Intel security http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/1999/8/ns-7129.html
Re: Quoting message in replies
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 07:24:14AM -0600, Duke Normandin wrote: I want to have my replies look like the following example: +-- | Hi | | Can anyone tell me the format to define a variable(for | the CVS server) in the inetd.conf file? +-- This will break software that uses the defacto standard for quoting. For example, I routinely use smart formatting in Jed to strip the leading s, reformat the long lines that someone sent, and reinsert the s, all with a single keystroke. It makes messages, especially those with orphans, much easier to read. Non-standard quoting would break this feature which I use many times a day. From .muttrc: # Name: indent_string # Type: string # Default: # # # Specifies the string to prepend to each line of text quoted in a # message to which you are replying. You are strongly encouraged not to # change this value, as it tends to agitate the more fanatical netizens. Regards, -rex
Re: Forwarding a message that contains an attachment
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:48:58AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: Using a large mallet, Duke Normandin whacked out: I want to forward a message including the attachment the message contains. Will Mutt do this by default, or do I have to instruct it to do so? If so, how? TIA set mime_fwd=ask-yes set mime_forward=ask-yes
Re: Changing the Mime type of the outgoing message by default?
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 05:29:44PM -0400, adam morley wrote: my point is the reason for not violating said should clause is archaic. my reason is that if your mail reader can't handle it, step into the 21st century and get a reader that knows how to wrap text. Mail systems unpredictably truncate lines longer than (IIRC) 1023 characters. So you're likely to have truncated paragraphs and sure to tick off just about everyone with your arrogant attitude. If you want to break RFCs get a job with M$, where doing so seems to be a good career move. -rex
Re: set pgp_encryptself: unknown variable
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 11:46:09PM +0200, Rod Pike wrote: I'm using version 1.2.5i of Mutt. Why do I get an error when I try to "set pgp_encryptself" in my muttrc? It's not a valid .muttrc setting. What you need is: source "/usr/local/src/mutt-1.2.5/contrib/pgp6.rc" in your .muttrc Aadjust path and version of pgp to suit, e.g., source "/usr/local/doc/mutt/samples/pgp2.rc" The default setting in pgp6.rc is to encrypt to yourself (see below) # create a pgp/mime encrypted attachment set pgp_encrypt_only_command="pgp6 +compatible +verbose=0 +encrypttoself +batchmode -aeft %r %f" But it is NOT the default in pgp2.rc Be aware that ANYONE can see that the message is encrypted to you. This is a security risk because it's easy to forget to unset the "+encrypttoself" when sending a message intended to be anonymous. HTH, -rex
Re: pgp 6.5.8 encryption fails (was: Problem with PGP linebreaks)
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 10:17:31AM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote: On 2001-03-13 18:47:45 +0100, Rejo Zenger wrote: set pgp_encrypt_sign_command="pgpewrap gpg --passphrase-fd 0 -v --batch --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f" Add "--textmode" behind "--encrypt --sign". I saw the "--always-trust" and hoped that setting the similar "completes_needed = 0" in pgp 6.5.8 would fix the problem with encryption (and encryption and signing). Alas, I had already set it with no change. There is a bug in Mutt or pgp6.rc: When encrypting to an untrusted key pgp 6.5.8 prompts for confirmation that the untrusted key should be used. The default response is "N" and when "y" is entered it is apparently not sent to pgp so the encryption fails. An ugly hack to make it work is to remove "+batchmode" from the encrypt and encrypt sign sections in pgp6.rc. This results in pgp waiting for a response (with no prompt message) after "y" is entered, so another "y" and enter can be blindly (there is no prompt or key echo) entered and the encryption proceeds without error. Is there some simple way to feed the first "y" to pgp so this ugly hack can be avoided? Is it fixed in the development version? This is the third time I've posted about this without responses. As far as I can tell, the problem exists for everyone who tries to use pgp 6.5.8 with Mutt. TIA, -rex
Re: can't pgp sign
On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 06:58:32PM +0800, Horace G. Friend III wrote: I've got pgp (ver. 6.5.8i) working outside of mutt. I can also verify signed msgs after I get their public keys outside of mutt. But I can't sign outgoing msgs. After selecting the (s)ign command from the pgp menu enter my passphrase, I get a received signal 11 press any key to continue... message and the message doesn't get sent. Do you have source "/usr/local/src/mutt-1.2.5/contrib/pgp6.rc" in .muttrc? (with the appropriate path for your machine) This is probably not the problem, but it's necessary. PGP 6.5.8 and pgp6.rc don't work smoothly together when encrypting to an untrusted key. When sending to an untrusted key PGP promts: WARNING: Because this public key is not certified with a trusted signature, it is not known with high confidence that this public key actually belongs to: "Nancy Nobody nosuchperson@nowhere". Are you sure you want to use this public key (y/N)? Mutt apparently does not pass a "y" response back to PGP and so the encryption fails due to the default "N." If the key is trusted the question is not asked and the encryption succeeds. I asked about a fix for this before but got no responses. Fiddling around today I found a hack that's ugly but works: remove the +batch from the encrypt command in pgp6.rc. During the encryption process after the prompt: Are you sure you want to use this public key (y/N)? appears, answer "y", then blindly "y" again and enter. The encrypted message will be sent. BTW, signing and verifying work for me within Mutt. HTH, -rex PGP signature
Re: mutt as newsreader
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 05:54:38PM +0100, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote: I'll take the patch from Vsevolod Volkov, and it works great. Some problem occurs when I use it to read news directly over an isdn- connection on the newsserver of my isp. But in combination with leafnode there's no problem. I've made some RPMS/SRPMS for SuSE 7.1/7.0. A small perl-script (needs perl-nntp-modul) is included because configuration of inews/cnews to post some news is in my experience to difficult. RPMs/SRPMS you find here http://packman.links2linux.de . Hello Waldemar, Are any other packages needed other than Perl-NNTP-Client-0.36-1.i386.rpm? Does it work with SuSE 6.4? Thanks for putting the rpms together. Regards, -rex
Re: Word-wrap when printing and quoting
On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 10:49:03AM -0600, David Champion wrote: On 2001.02.28, in [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Dirk Laurie" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is this: by the time vim gets control, the quote sign "" has already been prepended to the line. Try using "par q" to reformat your lines. You can set up a macro for this. http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~amc/Par/ if you don't already have it. It's like "fmt", but holy cow. Par is indeed a powerful formatting tool. Jed is a very good editor that has a mail_mode that does smart formatting of quoted paragraphs. No more "" characters in the middle of lines. http://space.mit.edu/~davis/jed/
Re: sending postponed messages
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 08:11:22AM +0100, Pacholleck wrote: I have already been through dejanews for search and as far as I understood form the thread it is really not possible to send the postponed messages in one bunch once I am connected to the net? I cannot afford long online times waiting that some sendmail deceides to try delivery again or recalling every of all those postponed in vi again. If you're offline when you send messages (not postpone them), sendmail should queue the messages. When you're online again, "sendmail -q" should flush the queue, i.e., send all the messages in the queue. Have a look at: http://lists.suse.com/archives/suse-linux-e/2000-Jun/2112.html http://cork.linux.ie/projects/install-sendmail/ HTH, -rex -- Photons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic.
pgp 6.5.8 encrypt fails
When invoked from mutt 1.2.5, pgp 6.5.8 fails when trying to encrypt to an untrusted (it works with a trusted key) key with the message: === Pretty Good Privacy(tm) Version 6.5.8 (c) 1999 Network Associates Inc. Uses the RSAREF(tm) Toolkit, which is copyright RSA Data Security, Inc. Export of this software may be restricted by the U.S. government. WARNING: Because this public key is not certified with a trusted signature, it is not known with high confidence that this public key actually belongs to: "xxx [EMAIL PROTECTED]". Encryption error For a usage summary, type: pgp -h For more detailed help, consult the PGP User's Guide. Press any key to continue... == But if pgp is invoked from the command line, it prompts: == WARNING: Because this public key is not certified with a trusted signature, it is not known with high confidence that this public key actually belongs to: "xxx [EMAIL PROTECTED]". Are you sure you want to use this public key (y/N)? == A "y" response encrypts properly, but the default "N" response gives: == Encryption error For a usage summary, type: pgp -h For more detailed help, consult the PGP User's Guide. == So the failure appears to be that mutt uses the default response of "N" instead of "y". I tried adding "+force" to the encryption line in pgp6.rc, because the pgp 6.5.8 Guide claims this will always force a "y" response. It does in some cases, but not to the above prompt. I searched the archives and found only the thread that Rod Pike started. He ultimately gave up on 6.5.8, but for a different reason. Are there any fixes to make mutt allow the user to respond to the prompt instead of hiding it and responding with the default? TIA -rex
Re: pgp 6.5.8 encrypt fails
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 02:52:33PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When invoked from mutt 1.2.5, pgp 6.5.8 fails when trying to encrypt to an untrusted (it works with a trusted key) key with the message: [...] So the failure appears to be that mutt uses the default response of "N" instead of "y". I tried adding "+force" to the encryption line in pgp6.rc, because the pgp 6.5.8 Guide claims this will always force a "y" response. It does in some cases, but not to the above prompt. Are there any fixes to make mutt allow the user to respond to the prompt instead of hiding it and responding with the default? Correction: Mutt does pass the PGP query to the user, but a "y" response apparently does not get passed back to PGP. BTW, pgp6.rc has "+encrypttoself". pgp2rc does not. IMO, encrypttoself is a security risk because it's extremely easy to forget to turn it off when sending anonymously. And, most users of prior versions of PGP would not expect the default behavior of Mutt to have changed without warning.
Re: gnupg vs pgp?
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 05:48:30AM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: One reason is security. GPG is free software, PGP is captive. This means you can get the GPG source, read it and compile it for yourself. What? PGP source code has always been available. The source for PGP 6.5.8 can be downloaded from http://www.pgpi.org [...] To paraphrase Eric Raymond's dictum in The Cathedral and the Bazaar, given enough eyeballs, all security holes are shallow. And GPG has had far more eyeballs go over it than recent versions of PGP. Perhaps. If the goal is to use source that has been examined by many people over the years, PGP 2.6.3i is a good choice. The German government has given a grant to GPG. Would you trust PGP if it were funded by the American government? Is there some reason to believe the German government isn't just as interested in reading your private mail as the US government is? Understand, I'm not saying the German government has a nefarious motive for the grant to GPG, but if the US government did the same the rumors of back doors would be much more rampant than they are. -- "They have computers, and they may have other weapons of mass destruction." --Janet Reno, US Attorney General, 2.27.98
Re: Using type 1 remailers and mutt.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 05:45:12PM +0930, Brian Salter-Duke wrote: On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 11:19:07PM -0800, rex wrote: Have you looked at premail? Last version I know of was 0.46, available at http://www.radiusnet.net/crypto/archive/remailer/premail/ Yes, I did look at it and need to look at it more. It is however yet another example of software that is now fairly old and is not being supported any more. Yes. :( There have been some updates in the Debian distribution. It's up to 0.46-7. Nyms and remailers are *so* much easier to use under DOS Windoze (Potato, Jack B Nymble), it's an embarassment to the *nix community. IMO. It seems you are right although I have never looked at them on a PC. I've been using nyms under Windoze/DOS since '95. I've yet to be able to get one working under Linux, though I've been using it for at least 5 years. Periodically I spend a few hours trying and invariably give up cursing in frustration. I fought with mixmaster 2.9b23 for a few more hours and got it to compile as both a client and a remailer. I suppose just the remailer would do, but couldn't tell from the docs and thought it would be easier to test the client. I can't make it work interactively as it apparently fails to find the public key for the recipient, even though the key is on ~/.pgp/pubring.pgp, which is where the man page says it should be. It did work from the command line with a file previously encrypted. Unfortunately, there is still the -T problem with using it from Mutt. A fix is mentioned in Ulf's TODO of 29 June 2000, but it hasn't happened. -rex
Re: Using type 1 remailers and mutt.
On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 09:17:10PM +0100, Wouter Verheijen wrote: I tried it too, without success. It is all too hard to set up and manage. I downloaded a recent mixmaster-list-file but only 3 hosts were active (the others had a reliability of 0.00%). There are quite a few active remailers. From www.plubius.net Last update: Mon 30 Oct 100 14:42:33 PST mixmaster history latency uptime shinn ++** 8:20 100.00% squirrel --+- 2:12:51 99.99% swiss ++*++*++19:43 99.99% noisebox **-*+++-28:28 99.99% dizum ***+ 8:09 99.98% riot +++-++- 2:16:04 99.98% cracow ***..-** 3:57:35 99.97% austria+ **++*+ 9:03 99.93% rot13 --++.-- 3:24:10 99.89% xganon ### *-+-__.# 10:27:05 99.82% [ more high-uptime mixmaster remailers snipped] Last update: Mon 30 Oct 100 14:42:33 PST remailer email addresshistory latency uptime --- squirrel [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---+ 2:05:45 100.00% shinn[EMAIL PROTECTED] ++*+ 8:59 100.00% redneck [EMAIL PROTECTED] **+#**#+###* :46 99.99% austria [EMAIL PROTECTED]*+** 9:36 99.99% dizum[EMAIL PROTECTED] ***+ 8:20 99.99% gretchen [EMAIL PROTECTED] --*-+**-++** 1:56:10 99.98% nym [EMAIL PROTECTED] **#**##++##+ 1:57 99.98% xganon [EMAIL PROTECTED] *-*-__.# 10:26:32 99.94% cracow [EMAIL PROTECTED]++*..-** 3:36:20 99.94% farout [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 8:32:01 99.84% arick[EMAIL PROTECTED] +--+ --+ 1:54:32 99.51% noisebox [EMAIL PROTECTED] +*- **+ 27:49 99.47% [...] I agree mixmaster lacks adequate documentation. It installed under RH6.2 a few months ago, but I cannot get it to compile under SuSE 6.4. [...] Found source directory openssl-0.9.3a. Warning: Can't find SSLeay/OpenSSL version number! Continue anyway? [y] Looking for libncurses.a... Found at /usr/lib/libncurses.so. Generating Makefile. Please enter a pass phrase for your remailer (must be the same whenever you re-compile Mixmaster). ... Compiling. Please wait. gmake: *** No rule to make target `mix.o', needed by `mix'. Stop. Error: The compilation failed. Please consult the documentation (section `Installation problems'). The documentation was no help. There is a mixmaster list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] but it seems spam is more common than replies to questions. -rex
Re: Using type 1 remailers and mutt.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 01:33:50PM +0930, Brian Salter-Duke wrote: http://anon.xg.nu/remailer-page.html#top The newsgroup alt.privacy.anon-server is the best of several that look as if they might have something about mixmaster, and remailers. It has a good FAQ posted every Wednesday. I think it is archived at:- http://www.almostnotcrazy.org/b/apasfaq/apas-faq.html Thanks. I am concentrating on type 1 remailers at present. I amy look again at mixmaster later. Have you looked at premail? Last version I know of was 0.46, available at http://www.radiusnet.net/crypto/archive/remailer/premail/ Premail facilitates using chained remailers: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((chain=3)) It also largely automates nym creation. Unfortunately, it uses old style comment addressing for commands, and Mutt is paternalistic about addresses and automatically rewrites (mungs, in this application) the addresses that need to be passed to premail. Mutt has a compile switch to turn off the automatic address rewriting, but there is a warning in the docs that it is broken and should not be used. I wish I were capable of fixing it. Nyms and remailers are *so* much easier to use under DOS Windoze (Potato, Jack B Nymble), it's an embarassment to the *nix community. IMO. -rex -- The King has note of all that they intend, By interception which they dream not of. --William Shakespeare, _Henry V_, Act II, Scene 2
Re: Message temporary file.
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 10:08:23AM +0930, Brian Salter-Duke wrote: OK, I'll just clean up this lot and then I let people on the list know how to use type I remailers with mutt. Looking forward to it. :) It would certainly be good if we could get Mixmaster to work, too. Remailers are essential tools for people who need to communicate but cannot afford to risk revealing their meatspace identity. Regards, -rex
Re: Disabling encryption on saved copies of outgoing.
On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 12:14:24AM -0400, David T-G wrote: It's almost pointless to save the encrypted version, since it is encrypted with someone else's public key and I can't decrypt and read my own sent mail. Well, then, you should simply encrypt to your key as well :-) If you contemplate EVER using remailers, this is a BAD idea. It's very easy to forget that outgoing messages are being encrypted to you, and that anyone can see that fact. So, when your message, carefully routed through a remailer chain to hide the source of the message, gets to the recipient, s/he can see that it is encrypted to you (as can anyone else with access to the encrypted message), which is a VERY strong clue as to who sent the message. It's really, really, easy to bungle security... -rex
Re: sending mail
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 10:17:17AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: Emmanuel Anne proclaimed on mutt-users that: it is quite hard to configure when you have an email adress different from your unix account. Generally, you end up using the sendmail "-f" switch, but in a case like this you get an "Authentication-Warning" with some mail agents like postfix (as you can see in the headers of this message). Should that matter? Anyone who filters on an X- header like that should, erm, re-evaluate his priorities :) I missed the beginning of this, but if Emmanuel has root access he can comment out/edit the line: O PrivacyOptions=authwarnings in sendmail.cf, which should prevent "X-Authentication-Warning..." from being added to the headers, after sendmail is restarted. Regards, -rex -- If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when was the last time you needed one? -- Tom Cargil, C++ Journal.
Re: Configuring Mutt with Sendmail and PPP.
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 10:36:45PM -0400, Damien Tougas wrote: I am using Mutt on a laptop, with a dialup connection. I have Sendmail configured to queue messages, and I force processing of the mailqueue when I connect via PPP. The problem is, every time mutt sends a message it forces sendmail to do a DNS lookup which in turn causes PPPd to make a connection to the net. (I know that this is Sendmail's fault, but from what I can see, there is no way to prevent Sendmail from doing this). I'm using Sendmail on a dialup and it queues messages when offline. When Mutt sends a message it's put in the queue and no dialup is initiated. Later, when I connect, I type "sendmail -q" and the queued messages are sent. Unfortunately, I don't remember where this is configured, but at least you know it's possible to stop sendmail/PPPd from dialing every time a message is queued (I think this is a PPPd issue). If someone else doesn't point out what needs to be configured, let me know and I'll dig into it more. Regards, -rex
Re: Configuring Mutt with Sendmail and PPP.
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 11:29:38AM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote: sendmail can be configured in the sendmail.cf to use mode=queueonly. (from man sendmail: DeliveryMode=x Set the delivery mode to x. Delivery modes are i interactive (synchronous) delivery b background (asynchronous) delivery q queue only; that is, actual delivery is done the next time the queue is run d deferred; the same as q except that database lookups (notably DNS and NIS lookups) are avoided My sendmail.cf is: O DeliveryMode=background and no dialup is initiated if the PC is offline when mail is sent. If the PC is online, the mail is sent immediately. -rex
Re: those users (was Re: Reply to all???)
On Sat, Jul 01, 2000 at 04:03:19PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: Actually, listserv allows people to add tags to their subject - something like HELP: mutt dumps core or whatever. People can subscribe to see only whichever topics they choose. I have hosted a LISTSERV (TM) list with about 400 subscribers for several years. The only way to make topics work on my list is to moderate it, i.e., the moderator must approve each post and possibly edit it to add or change a topic because a large fraction of the subscribers do not (even after repeated reminders) add one of the pre-assigned topic keywords, or change the topic keyword when the thread drifts into another area. Perhaps it would work acceptably well on a list with more technically competent users, like this one. Regards, -rex
Re: [OT] What PGP version is recommended?
On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 12:18:42AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: In particular, I'd be interested whether someone has been able to locate a Unix version of PGP 6.5.3, which seems to be the most recent version available for the well-known graphical OSes. AFAIK, 6.5.3 is only available for WinX. 6.5.2 for Unix is available from: http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp.html However, MIT won't export from the US (except to Canada). NAI will export, but apparently only has the commercial version and a demo: http://www.pgp.com/asp_set/products/tns/jump_page_011800.asp -rex
Re: HELP: How do I change my from address format?
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 12:40:42AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: A rather trivial question - but I want to change my from address format - from the existing From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [EMAIL PROTECTED] to From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Suresh Ramasubramanian) The INSTALL file says that "--enable-exact-address" prevents Mutt from altering the "From:*" line. It also says the option is broken and not to use it. Too bad, I use(d) a program that depends on comment form addressing. -rex
Re: HELP: How do I change my from address format?
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 04:26:44PM -0400, Erik Jacobsen wrote: Since when are rfc 822 comments deprecated? There's an update for RFC822 which says: Also, because some legacy implementations interpret the comment, comments SHOULD NOT generally be used in address fields to avoid confusing such implementations. I use a legacy app (premail) that interprets the comment and thus need to be able to generate comments in addresses. Comments are not supposed to be used by MTAs, e.g., in SMTP exchanges, but should be kept by MUAs, so I've always used the exact addressing (where is THAT broken, by-the-way?) and considered the non-exact addressing broken! I don't know what the problem with Mutt's implementation is, only that the INSTALL file says it's broken. Anyone know what Bad Things happen when --enable-exact-address is used? I guess I could try it. :) -rex
Re: idiot requires email help
On Thu, Apr 13, 2000 at 02:51:19PM -0400, David T-G wrote: ...and then Belinda Roussel said... % I need to send an html web page on Unix and I don't know how to. Could % anyone please give me some guidance or direct me to a helpful web site Although this is the list for users of, and questions specifically pertaining to, the mutt mail program, perhaps someone can be of help. She wants to periodically and automatically mail a web page from *nix to a Netscape user and have it appear as HTML, not as raw ASCII. I suggested: You can MIME encode and send from the command line with Mutt: mutt -s "daily data" -a ~/data.html [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/boilerplate_text "data.html" is the HTML formatted file, "boilerplate_text" is any file (to make mutt happy), and "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is the recipient address . You can create a shell script that will issue this command periodically using cron. It seems to work, though there may be better ways. -rex -- "They have computers, and they may have other weapons of mass destruction." --Janet Reno, US Attorney General, 2.27.98
Re: Reply-To more than one recipient
On Tue, Feb 15, 2000 at 12:15:28AM +0100, Byrial Jensen wrote: On Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:50:42 -0600, David DeSimone wrote: I don't remember if it is legal to put more than one address in the From: header. It is legal according to RFC 822 if and only if you also have a Sender: header which states who among the authors actually sent the message. OBNit: It's not "only if." From RFC822update: The originator fields indicate the mailbox(es) of the source of the message. The "From:" field specifies the author(s) of the message, that is, the mailbox(es) of the person(s) or system(s) responsible for the writing of the message. The "Sender:" field specifies the mailbox of the agent responsible for the actual transmission of the message. For example, if a secretary were to send a message for another person, the mailbox of the secretary would appear in the "Sender:" field and the mailbox of the actual author would appear in the "From:" field. If the originator of the message can be indicated by a single mailbox and the author and transmitter are identical, the "From:" field SHOULD be used and the "Sender:" field SHOULD NOT be used. Otherwise, both fields SHOULD appear. Aside from it being "SHOULD NOT" rather than "MUST NOT," if the secretary in the example were the transmitter, but not the author, the "Sender;" line should appear even if there is only one address on the "From:" line. I wonder if there are _any_ MUAs that implement this? -rex
Re: Reading encrypted messages (not)
On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 12:59:22PM +, Tom Friedetzky wrote: On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 12:35:35PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote: [...] ... you add +encrypttoself to these commands. This does the trick nicely. Thanks a lot! Don't forget that _anyone_ who has access to the encrypted message can then see that you are one of the recipients. If you're sending anonymous mail, or do not want a link between yourself and the recipient, this is a BIG security hole. -rex -- The King has note of all that they intend, By interception which they dream not of. --William Shakespeare, _Henry V_, Act II, Scene 2
Re: Personalities
On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 08:46:54PM +0200, Mikko Hänninen wrote: [helpful detailed example snipped] I'm trying to make "personalities" that are as separate as possible. That means I want to change everything in the headers that points to [EMAIL PROTECTED], including in the envelope, when I reply to a message to an alternate identity. Using your example, I've come close with two profiles: # rex's profile # set rex (From and Organization, no Reply-To) my_hdr From: \"rex\" [EMAIL PROTECTED] My_hdr Organization: None set hostname="ptw.com" set sendmail="/usr/lib/sendmail -oi -oem" # user's profile my_hdr From: \"first last\" [EMAIL PROTECTED] my_hdr Organization: You're kidding, right? # change hostname so "Message-ID:" has "otherdomain" set hostname="otherdomain.com" # set the envelope to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" # "PrivacyOptions=authwarnings" should be commented out in sendmail.cf set sendmail="/usr/lib/sendmail -oi -oem [EMAIL PROTECTED]" The above profile files are sourced from .muttrc: # PROFILE: rex # load rex # ~/.mutt/profile-rex send-hook . source ~/.mutt/profile-rex # PROFILE user # ~/.mutt/profile-user send-hook '~C "user@otherdomain\.com"' source ~/.mutt/profile-user This works fairly well. When I reply to mail addressed to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]," "rex" only appears in two places in the header. The first is in "Received from rex@localhost," and the second in "Received from ... HELO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). The first can be fixed by adding a user "user" to my system and mailing from there. The second is added by my ISP, and I see no way to eliminate the revealing "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". Anyone have any ideas short of using an anonymous remailer? I'm not looking for real security here, I'd just like to keep "rex" out of the headers when replying as another personality. I'm using sendmail, using ptw.com as a smart relay, and masquerading as ptw.com. TIA, -rex -- Photons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic.
Re: mutt/gpg crashes Outlook 2000?
On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 06:26:41PM -0800, Duncan Watson wrote: The problems are many but at least from session to session you should be protecting outlook users. The biggest problem is during a session when you receive new mail from an outlook user not in your oudb. They might get mail from you that would crash their machines. As a side benefit mail initially from you to an outlook user would still not be signed. No offense, but if Outlook crashes the lame M$ OS when it receives RFC 822 compliant mail, why should we be concerned? Rather than try to code a workaround, wouldn't it be best to show the world that M$ employs incompetent programmers who can't code standards on the rare occasions when they attempt to do so? -rex -- You can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her think.
Re: PGP problem.
On Thu, Dec 23, 1999 at 01:11:41PM +0100, Ashley Penney wrote: ... we need to have the ability to encrypt the entire mail so that we can send updates to RIPE. I've been told mutt cannot do this, am I wrong? Mutt is capable of signing in the old style and the method is detailed in the file PGP-Notes.txt which is part of Mutt's documentation: Q: "I don't like that PGP/MIME stuff, but want to use the old way of PGP-signing my mails. Can't you include that with mutt?" No. Application/pgp is not really suited to a world with MIME, non-textual body parts and similar things. Anyway, if you really want to generate these old-style attachments, include the following macro in your ~/.muttrc (line breaks for readability, this is actually one line): macro compose S "Fpgp +verbose=0 -fast +clearsig=on\ny^T^Uapplication/pgp; format=text; x-action=sign\n" HTH, -rex -- "They have computers, and they may have other weapons of mass destruction." --Janet Reno, US Attorney General, 2.27.98
Re: pgp and save-decrypted
On Mon, Dec 20, 1999 at 01:23:19PM +0100, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: This way I strongly recommend everybody to use 'set psp_encryptself' in ~/.muttrc (for PGP) or 'encrypt-to 0xKEYID' in ~/.gnupg/options (for GnuPG) instead of saving (encrypted) mails in plaintext... This is very dangerous if you ever wish to be anonymous because anyone can see your identity. It's all too easy to forget to unset this option when sending an anonymous message (don't ask how I know :). -rex
Re: Editing a bounced message
On Tue, Oct 12, 1999 at 09:52:44AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
When using unstable, "resend-message" essentially behaves like the
recalling of a postponed message. Actually, it shares lots of code
with that function. Thus, you can just re-send the message.
The problem with this is that the message will be sent depending on
the headers, that is, every recipient gets the message again.
You can work around this by changing the To and CC headers of the
submission to ORig-To and Orig-CC or something like that, and by
adding a To header of your own. As an alternative, it should be not
too difficult to implement a send-to function on the compose menu,
which sends a message with the given headers to recipients which are
entered on a prompt.
Would this fit your needs?
Thanks for the response.
LISTSERV(tm) has a moderation option that sends messages to be posted
to the editor for approval. Approval requires that the MUA insert
"Resent-From: the_editor", and "Resent-To: the_list" header lines and
to leave the "From: ..." line as is. Mutt does this when a message is
"bounced", but it does not offer the opportunity to edit the bounced
message. However, with the help of members of this list, I've now got
a shell script that allows editing after bounce is selected. Normally,
it simply calls sendmail. However, if a message is bounced, the
presence of "Resent-From: the_editor" in the headers results in a call
to an editor so any excess quoting, etc., can be fixed. Since there
may be a large number of messages to be approved that need no editing,
minimizing the number of keystrokes is important, and this solution
does that. All that's required is "b", the alias for the list address,
"Enter" to confirm, and the editor exit key(s). Here's the current
version of the script "bounce":
(.muttrc has set sendmail="/home/rex/bin/bounce")
#! /bin/sh
# uses ideas from a script by Winfried Szukalski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
from_file=${HOME}/.sendit_pre
to_file=${HOME}/.sendit_post
POSTTOOL=/usr/lib/sendmail
POSTARGS="-oi -oem -t"
EDITARGS="-tmp -f mail_mode"
cat ${from_file}
if (grep ^"Resent-From: $USER@" ${from_file})
then
sed '/Delivered-To: '$USER'@/d' ${from_file} ${to_file}
mv ${to_file} ${from_file}
$VISUAL ${from_file} ${EDITARGS}
fi
${POSTTOOL} ${POSTARGS} ${from_file}
#rm -f ${from_file}
This seems like a reasonable solution that doesn't require adding code
to Mutt. I am concerned that by calling sendmail with the "-t" option
instead of passing parameters as Mutt does I may be causing a problem
that hasn't shown up yet. OTOH, perhaps the only reason for Mutt's
passing parameters is to pass "--" (which I do not need or want).
Regards,
-rex
Re: Editing a bounced message
On Tue, Oct 12, 1999 at 03:37:27PM -0500, David DeSimone wrote:
Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As an alternative, it should be not too difficult to implement a
send-to function on the compose menu, which sends a message with the
given headers to recipients which are entered on a prompt.
Seems like it would be just as easy to use edit-message, change the
message around, then when you're done, go ahead and bounce the
resulting edited message. Doesn't sound too difficult, and works with
current code.
Yes, this would be an easy solution, but it doesn't work for me (95.3i).
If the message is edited ("e"), the bounce function is disabled, and "b"
results in a Bcc: query instead of bouncing the message as it normally
would.
rex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#! /bin/sh
# uses ideas from a script by Winfried Szukalski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
from_file=${HOME}/.sendit_pre
to_file=${HOME}/.sendit_post
POSTTOOL=/usr/lib/sendmail
POSTARGS="-oi -oem -t"
EDITARGS="-tmp -f mail_mode"
cat ${from_file}
if (grep ^"Resent-From: $USER@" ${from_file})
then
sed '/Delivered-To: '$USER'@/d' ${from_file} ${to_file}
mv ${to_file} ${from_file}
$VISUAL ${from_file} ${EDITARGS}
fi
${POSTTOOL} ${POSTARGS} ${from_file}
#rm -f ${from_file}
This doesn't look right. "sendmail -t" is going to read the message's
headers, and if there are Cc: recipients, they will get a second copy of
the message sent to them, because of your bounce mechanism.
Mutt passes the recipients to your script, and you should go ahead and
pass them on to sendmail; then the message will go only to the recipient
specifies in your bounce command.
I knew there was a reason I didn't like "-t". Thanks.
POSTARGS should have "-t" removed, and your call to ${POSTTOOL} should
look like this:
${POSTTOOL} ${POSTARGS} "$@" ${from_file}
Actually, Mutt's arguments that it passes to your script might already
include -oi and -oem, so you probably could forget ${POSTARGS} entirely.
I've looked at $@. Mutt passes "--", then the address(es), and .muttrc
includes "-oi -oem" in the sendmail call, so they may be needed (I
have no idea what they do, and couldn't find them in the sendmail docs
I have).
I'll remove the "-t" and use "$@", as you suggest, however I want to
dump the first argument ("--") first, as it makes premail choke. A
shift command should handle that, eh?
Having said all that, perhaps you should give edit-message and
bounce another try.
I did, just before writing this. It still doesn't work for me. Does
it work for you?
Thanks,
-rex
Re: Editing a bounced message
On Mon, Oct 11, 1999 at 07:07:32AM +, winfried szukalski wrote:
I use the script you are looking for together with
[...]
Thanks much, Winfried. I have adapted your script to call the editor
only when the message is bounced. The script resides in /home/rex/bin
and is named "bounce." .muttrc has
set sendmail="/home/rex/bin/bounce"
#= bounce
#! /bin/sh
# adapted from a script by Winfried Szukalski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# allows editing a bounced ("b") message before sending it.
from_file=${HOME}/.sendit_pre
POSTTOOL=/usr/lib/sendmail
POSTARGS="-oi -oem -t"
cat ${from_file}
if (grep "Resent-From: $USER@" ${from_file})
then
$VISUAL ${from_file}
fi
${POSTTOOL} ${POSTARGS} ${from_file}
rm -f ${from_file}
# end bounce =
In normal use, bounce is transparent. If a message is bounced, the
presence of "Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" in the header triggers the
"if (grep ..." and my editor (XJed) opens the message.
The ability to edit a bounced message is very useful for listowners
using LISTSERV(tm) for moderated lists.
-rex
Editing a bounced message
I host a moderated list using LISTSERV(tm), and have a frequent need to trim off excess quoting and other detritus from messages submitted for approval before bouncing them to the list. Unfortunately, Mutt's bounce does not offer any opportunity to do this. Forwarding to the list works, but is quite awkward because it requires changing the "From: ..." line, adding "Resent-From: rex@ptw", and removing all the lines forwarding adds. The (I think) ideal solution would be for Mutt to offer the option to edit the message after "bounce" is selected. Eudora offers this feature. Surely Mutt should also. ;) TIA for any pointers. -rex
Re: Premail with Mutt
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 01:56:23PM -0500, David DeSimone wrote: For reasons that are still not clear to me, Mutt calls sendmail by inserting a "--" argument between the options and the mail addresses. Apparently this is an option recognized by later sendmails, so that even if an address starts with a "-" (is that even RFC822-legal?), sendmail will still recognize it as an address, not an option. However, non-sendmail programs appear not to recognize this option, and they get some grief from its use. I suggest you comment out the line that adds this delimeter, in Mutt, and see how it goes. David, thanks much for the pointer. I had mutt call a shell script that strips the "--" and then calls premail, which then calls sendmail. This works for unencrypted mail. However, that's not the only problem. For encrypting mail, premail expects a To: him@there ((encrypted-pgp)) line, and Mutt has a "feature" that automatically mungs such lines into To: "(encrypted-pgp)" him@there I'd much prefer the default behavior of Mutt to be to leave headers as they are written, particularly as long as they are RFC822 compliant. Do you (or anyone) happen to know how to disable this "feature," e.g., what changes need to be made to the source, and in which file? I found nothing about it in the manual, and looked in the source but it was hopeless. TIA, -rex
Re: Message Width
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 10:57:30PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote: 1) setting your textwidth is out of consideration for those that receive your mail, whereas having vim and using it to reformat mail is your concern when you read your mail Maximum line width is specified in RFC1855: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Limit line length to fewer than 65 characters and end a line with a carriage return. I had someone send a message to my mailing list with a 2047+ character line who complained that it was truncated. :) FWIW, Jed has "smart formatting" in its mail mode which will reformat a paragraph (Esc-q) by stripping the quote character, reformatting the paragraph, and then re-inserting the quote character. If that's not good enough, par is available. -rex
Premail with Mutt
After hours of fruitless attempts and web searching, Mutt 93.5i still does not send mail with premail 0.46. Premail works from the command line and will send an encrypted message that Mutt can decode with PGP 2.6.3i, but when attempting to send from Mutt, premail reports: unknown option -- . Please send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with details Premail is set to intercept calls to sendmail in .muttrc: set sendmail="/usr/local/bin/premail" Any help with premail/Mutt and/or an alternate to premail to use with remailers/nyms much appreciated. -rex
Re: Cannot paste to XJed with Mutt/KDE
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 06:28:05PM -0400, Rob Reid wrote: At 8:35 PM EDT on August 28 rex sent off: Mutt is running in a KDE Konsole (which can I paste to), but Mutt is calling XJed in another window (I don't know what it is -- xterm? -- or how to change it) and pasting does not work there from a KDE Konsole or KDE Terminal or xterm window. However, if I start Mutt from an xterm window or KDE Terminal window instead of a KDE Konsole window, pasting into XJed when I'm composing a message works. So it appears to be a problem with KDE Konsole not allowing pasting to a spawned window. I guess a work-around is not to use Konsole for Mutt. I think you've encountered an annoying oddity/feature of jed's default mouse handling. Try holding down the shift key while you do your mouse operations in (x)jed, i.e. shift-middle button to paste. Thanks, but my verson of Jed (0.99.6) doesn't require this (BTW, it's got pull-down menus, too) I've done more experimenting, and both KDE Konsole and KDE kvt (0.18.7) appear to be incompatible with XJed -- but only when it's called from Mutt. If Mutt is running in a Konsole window and I'm composing a message in XJed pasting does not work from anywhere (might work from rxvt or xterm). If Mutt is running in a kvt window, pasting from Netscape works, but pasting from a kvt or Konsole window does not. However, pasting from kvt or Konsole into XJed running (not called from Mutt) in a kvt window works, and pasting from a rxvt or xterm window into XJed called from Mutt works. Pasting from another Mutt (session running in a kvt window) into a message being composed in XJed does not work. :( Pasting from that session into XJed running alone in a kvt window _does_ work. Finally, pasting from another Mutt session running in a rxvt or xterm window _does_ work. Now I need to remember to always start from xterm or rxvt when I want to paste into a message. BTW, pasting between kvt, Konsole, xterm, and rxvt works in any combination. Thanks for the reply. -rex
Re: Cannot paste to XJed with Mutt/KDE
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 01:02:10PM -0500, David DeSimone wrote: rex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pasting to Xjed running as Mutt's editor worked under RH5.2. With RH6.0 and KDE it does not -- nothing happens. Pasting _from_ Xjed while composing a message still works, but usually I want to go the other way. Mutt just runs in an xterm, or rxvt, or whatever you want, and *that* program is what handles the cuts and pastes. How can it be Mutt's fault? I didn't mean to suggest that it is a problem with Mutt, but a Usenet search was fruitless and I though someone here might have run into the problem. Mutt is running in a KDE Konsole (which can I paste to), but Mutt is calling XJed in another window (I don't know what it is -- xterm? -- or how to change it) and pasting does not work there from a KDE Konsole or KDE Terminal or xterm window. However, if I start Mutt from an xterm window or KDE Terminal window instead of a KDE Konsole window, pasting into XJed when I'm composing a message works. So it appears to be a problem with KDE Konsole not allowing pasting to a spawned window. I guess a work-around is not to use Konsole for Mutt. Thanks for the reply -rex
Cannot paste to XJed with Mutt/KDE
Pasting to Xjed running as Mutt's editor worked under RH5.2. With RH6.0 and KDE it does not -- nothing happens. Pasting _from_ Xjed while composing a message still works, but usually I want to go the other way. Any suggestions? TIA, -rex
Re: Fwd: RE: looking for a mail client
On Mon, Aug 09, 1999 at 10:34:30PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: On 1999-08-09 12:43:07 -0700, rex wrote: I don't mind -- too much -- having to spend a couple of hours reading enough about procmail A couple of hours? In doc/pgp-notes.txt, there is a recipe readily available for cut paste. Yes, but it didn't initially work for me -- I've forgotten why -- and so I got sidetracked reading about procmail and .forward (which was a red herring as it's not needed), and found some other things that didn't work. Eventually I got it right and it works as advertised (getting old and losing one's memory is a bitch). I'd really suggest you try reading the documentation provided with mutt. Reading PGP-Notes.txt was the first thing that I did. The problem was that procmail didn't work -- the recipe provided was fine. More specifically, doc/pgp-notes.txt has an example macro which can be used to generate "old-style" PGP signed messages. Changing it to do encryption is straigth-forward, though this won't be as simple to use as PGP/MIME encryption. Another thing that I'd forgotten. :( Thanks. BTW, personally I'm using this to generate old-style PGP encrypted messages: macro compose "\ee" "Fpgp -eatf " (Yes, I do send such messages sometimes, but only to a very special recipient who has the specific joy of using Lotus Notes. ;-) That's exactly the position I'm in. The recipient's employer dictates using Lotus Notes internally. On a related note, does anyone have Mutt seamlessly working with remailer traffic? You mean messages you receive through nym servers? We don't have a handler for this so far, so you'll have to use premail, or hack a new handler for this. Nym servers, yes. Oh joy, Yet Another Program to configure. If my memory gets any worse I'm going to have to slink back to Windows where this stuff just works (Potato (DOS) or Jack B. Nymble (Win95+)). I'll stop whining now. Thanks for the help. -rex
Re: Fwd: RE: looking for a mail client
On Mon, Aug 09, 1999 at 12:18:17PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: On 1999-08-08 23:38:32 -0700, rex wrote: Why do you call a convention that was in use worldwide for several years and perfectly functional, a bug? While it's not an actual bug, it's _not_ perfectly functional. There are several issues with traditional cleartext PGP signatures: Yes, I agree. I was thinking of encryption, which has always worked well for me. - When your mail user agent doesn't support PGP, it has no decent access to the signed text. Not very nice. But I don't understand this. The signature is just part of the message and doesn't interfere with reading the signed part of the message at all, IME. And what's wrong with backwards compatibility? Nothing. That's why Mutt is actually able to _receive_ traditional-style PGP signed message, but sends PGP signed messages in a format which complies with RFC 2015, a Proposed Internet Standard. After procmail is used to fix up the message, yes. BTW, I was reading about RFC 2015 and the opinion was expressed that it probably would NOT become a standard due to some issues that I don't remember. You're in a much better position to evaluate this than I am. Note, BTW, that PGP 6.5.1 seems to have some code to handle PGP/MIME. At least I recall to have seen options referring to this in some examples. You may wish to further investigate this. Thanks, I'll have a look. However, almost all of my PGP needs require the traditional format and there is nothing I can do to change that as I have no control over the other end of the link. I think it's unfortunate that the Mutt developers haven't recognized that this is a common situation and allowed for it as an option instead of forcing the user to spend time working around the problem. -rex
Re: Fwd: RE: looking for a mail client
On Sun, Aug 08, 1999 at 10:42:36PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote: Shao Zhang [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: But, what about outgoing messages? If I pgp sign a mail to a friend who is using pine as his MUA. When he views the attachment, pine will complain it is an unknown attachment and will ask user whether or not to save it in a file. This is technically a bug in pine. If Mutt repeats this bug, we don't make any progress. People using pine should bug the developers to fix it if they care about it. Until then, if you care about making life easier for your pine-using friends, you can use macros to produce old style messages or find another work around. Bugs need to be worked around and fixed, not supported. Why do you call a convention that was in use worldwide for several years and perfectly functional, a bug? And what's wrong with backwards compatibility? IMO, Mutt is following an elitist path on this issue which is hurting Mutt and the PGP user community. Let's face it, PGP is far more important to freedom than Mutt, and intentionally making PGP harder to use is a serious mistake. If there is any bug involved, it's Mutt that is buggy for not having the option of being backwards compatible with a solidly established worldwide convention. Just my $0.02 -rex -- "...the very inclusion of the right to keep and bear arms in the Bill of Rights shows that the framers of the Constitution considered it an individual right." -- Judge Sam R. Cummings in US v Emerson, March 30, 1999
Re: 1) PGP 6.5.1 B) Icon
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 07:27:34AM -0700, Dav Coleman wrote:
I figured out how to get signing working with pgp6. The main problem
was that pgp5 apparently came with executables named pgps, pgpe, pgpk
and so on. My rpm of PGP 6.5.1 only provided one executable, 'pgp',
and the idea is to use different switches (-s -k, etc).
There's a pgp executable that gets called by pgps, pgpe,...links.
It don't understand why the syntax was ever changed from the original
switches.
So, I created a script file in /usr/bin named pgps which simply calls
'pgp -s $*' ...voila, I can sign messages now.
Sounds good.
I tried the same trick with pgpe = pgp -e $* but my pgp does not like
one of the switches mutt is throwing it. I'll try to work that out today
and post an answer to the mailing list.
Hope you do. I still don't know what 6.5.1 offers that 5.0i doesn't
though.
One thing to note: I set up the following in .procmailrc:
#~/.procmailrc
MAILDIR=$HOME/Mail
DEFAULT=$MAILDIR/inbox
LOGFILE=$MAILDIR/procmail.log
:0:
* ^TOgtk-app-devel
gtk-app-devel
:0:
* ^TOiluvspam
spam-bucket
Since this defines DEFAULT as /home/dav/inbox, I had to change muttrc
to look for new mail there instead of the default /var/spool/mail/dav
It took me more than once, and I'm not sure what I did differently
to make it start working. My .procmailrc is:
#~/.procmailrc
# verbose mode on until debugged
VERBOSE=on
MAILDIR=$HOME/Mail
LOGFILE=$MAILDIR/procmail.log
## From Mutt's PGP-Notes.txt
## Section to enable decryption/sig-check of old-style PGP messages.
:0
* !^Content-Type: message/
* !^Content-Type: multipart/
* !^Content-Type: application/pgp
{
:0 fBw
* ^-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
* ^-END PGP MESSAGE-
| formail \
-i "Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=encrypt"
:0 fBw
* ^-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
* ^-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
* ^-END PGP SIGNATURE-
| formail \
-i "Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=sign"
}
:0:
* ^Subject.*make money
discard
#--
Is there any special reason you changed the default directory? It
seems to work fine with the original /var/spool/mail/rex
-rex
Re: Another PGP question
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 01:42:45AM +0200, Wilhelm Wienemann wrote: AFAIK there is a keybinding in mutt that allows to extract a PGP public key. In my help-menu for the index there is a line ^K extract-keys extract PGP public keys Unfortunately if I use the required keys (ctrl + K) this keybinding wont add the requested PGP-public-key to my ~/.pgp/pubring.pgp file. Try it on this message. Key matching expected Key ID CC8F2E11 not found in file '/home/wieneman/.pgp/pubring.pgp'. WARNING: Can't find the right public key-- can't check signature integrity. [-- End of PGP output --] --- cut here - This is expected if you don't have the public key for Russell. You need his public key to verify the signature. No keys found in '/tmp/mutt-kalwien-3565-4'. Keyring add error. ^^ Press any key to continue... --- cut here - What's going wrong here? The message was _signed_. It did not contain a public key, so there was no public key to extract. People commonly sign messages, but they do not normally put their public key in a message unless someone requests it. I'll insert my public key below and you can try adding it to your keyring. It uses RSA, so some newer versions of PGP may have a problem with it. -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use mQCNAi4kFfsAAAEEANrPevHUbtzYDbp0lTHwoaExUIuxiNueC0vfARVW8v+QJs5x uycTAXZ2js1MpIBjIQkBIETS577WpmYMAOVu7RSDrshSYJ8bMEKwpPAvrGmuHd9/ k8HR30eiTJ0/y7GPbCCLncQ2RNfc2Y1oAWO0hLFHy4EVr6CDc28sjl9sYg/JAAUR tB5SZXggU2hlYXNieSA8cnNoZWFAbmV0Y29tLmNvbT6JAJUCBRAx+Ah4byyOX2xi D8kBAchTA/94Tuvnj18N8MbFA5tG5OQ+Bx9uVr8XauaXSxvg7+Y86FtR426rd5m8 o1KS58zBAH2P23IBVk0ON9UIOT4iPBfBQeTUIvZh3FcV73EablFtRAhGojsJFoGY CVfDWLS/UtBJ3eD+eAYmD8L8Z2oUK0voDecTHEVgW59SJ7pQdPxNA7QLcmV4QHB0 dy5jb220F3JleC5zaGVhc2J5QHBhbmFzaWEuY29ttA1yZXhAY29hY2gub3Jn =r4oF -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- -rex
Re: Email client poll
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 12:03:57PM -0600, Tom Hall wrote: If there aren't enough mutt users, mutt will not be kept up to date, and as new mail protocols etc. are created, mutt will eventually stop working. This, to me, is the main reason we need to keep a good base of users. I also think we could expand this base a lot if pre-compiled DOS and/or W32 binaries were easily available. Yarn users would be good candidates to use Mutt if DOS/W32 binaries were available. -rex
[OT] XJed B0.99-6 compile failure
Sorry for the OT post, but I expect some of you are using the B0.99-6 Jed, and I cannot find anything on Usenet and the Jed mailing list seems to have vanished from riemann.iam.uni-bonn.de B0.99-6 requires S-lang 1.3.6 or better. I installed 1.3.7. Then I compiled Jed. It works (the drop down menus are really nice). But "make xjed" fails when the compiler cannot find: Xlib.h, Xutil.h, Xatom.h keysym.h, cursorfont.h, and Intrinsic.h The includes for these files appear in xterm.c: #ifndef VMS # include X11/Xlib.h # include X11/Xutil.h . . . None of these files appear to be on my system. There is no X11 directory below the "src" directory that xterm.c is in. I'm running Red Hat 6.0 with KDE. Suggestions, pointers to a Jed mailing list, etc, would be most appreciated. -rex -- Linux 2.2.1
Re: Place .signature above message body
On Sat, Jun 05, 1999 at 10:20:12PM +0700, m4v3r1ck wrote:
I'm a new mutt user.
Can anybody tell me how to make my .signature appear in mail body but
before the contents?
Some mail readers discard the line with the sig marker ("-- ") and
everything below that. I think life will be simpler for you if you
leave the sig below the content.
-rex
--
Linux 2.2.1
Re: [OT] username+whatever@isp.org
On Tue, Apr 13, 1999 at 09:18:35AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: On 1999-04-13 02:43:01 +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote: It's a sendmail feature. qmail, by default, has user-whatever, controlled by .qmail-files in the user's homedir. For completeness' sake: Postfix supports both variants by making the separating character configurable. The author of the Email Addressing FAQ solicits input about MTAs. Postfix is not mentioned in the FAQ. --- http://www.faqs.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eli Pogonatus) Summary: How to add and use submailboxes to your email address. Archive-name: mail/addressing Last-modified: (2 Jun 98 14:32:39) URL: http://www.qz.to/~eli/faqs/addressing.html Reason-for-last-modification: exim, qmail correction, trn4 update Reason-for-previous-modification: MMDF updated, Pine updated If you can add information PLEASE DO. This is Unix centric because I have answers for Unix, not because I am trying to shun other platforms. --- -rex -- Linux 2.2.1
Re: [OT] username+whatever@isp.org
On Mon, Apr 12, 1999 at 02:45:22PM -0700, rex wrote: I'm trying to get my ISP to support this, and need the (sort of) FAQ on it as a selling point. Anyone got a pointer to it? AFAIK, it's not made it into any RFCs. http://www.faqs.org Addressing FAQ -- Linux 2.2.1
Re: signature
On Mon, Mar 29, 1999 at 01:58:11AM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
Err it is _plain_ _wrong_ (IMnsHO anyway) to reply _before_ a quoted message.
Rules in replying:
-strip all irrelevant stuff but leave enough for anyone to jump in and join the
thread
If following netiquette is important to you, your long line above
("-strip...") violates netiquette.
Sometimes putting the reply before the quote saves the reader time,
e.g., if the Subject: is "What is the URL for " and the quote
is "See the subject", there is no point in quoting it first (if at all).
So I use both. Usually, I put the quote first. However, if I think
most readers will not need the quote, I put the reply first. That
way the quote is there for those who need it, but the majority who
don't are saved the bother of scrolling down.
OBMutt content:
I've not been happy with the *nix editors, but just switched to
using xjed, and it looks good so far. However, sometimes I want
to run Mutt outside of X. How can I tell Mutt to use xjed under X,
and jed when not in X?
-rex
--
Linux 2.2.1
