On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 07:43:31AM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
Hi!
[Finally I must join this thread now.]
On Sat Jul 19, 2003 at 01:05:32AM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
This argument just doesn't make it. Mutt does filtering (shouldn't
Where does mutt filter you messages? With
Also sprach Bijan Soleymani (Mon 21 Jul 02003 at 12:08:29PM -0400):
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 07:43:31AM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
snip /
ad IMAP: A MUA has to support IMAP or IMAP would be another POP. IMAP
mails belongs on the server side and not on the client.
ad POP: Do you
Hi!
On Mon Jul 21, 2003 at 12:08:29PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
And you could ignore to use mutt if you don't want to mess with a MTA.
BTW, ever tried to run eximconfig with option 2? You can setup a
smarthost using mailserver within 9.3 seconds (if you are fast ;-).
But that means:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 09:23:40PM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
Hi!
On Mon Jul 21, 2003 at 12:08:29PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
And you could ignore to use mutt if you don't want to mess with a MTA.
BTW, ever tried to run eximconfig with option 2? You can setup a
smarthost
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:57:15 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So the real solution would be to find a way to switch smarthosts more
easily.
I dunno. Accounts / Edit / SMTP server is pretty darn easy.
Again, what's wrong with using your own MTA? Nobody's provided
Hi!
On Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 10:49:01PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
ad IMAP: A MUA has to support IMAP or IMAP would be another POP. IMAP
mails belongs on the server side and not on the client.
Well, isn't offlineimap something like a caching personal imap server?
offlineimap is some sort of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 11:02:21PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Really now? I saw some paranoid concerns, but that doesn't address
issues with using your own MTA.
Nice to see that my valid problems are chalked up as nothing but paranoia.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 08:04:25AM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
That's true but memory is expensive ;-).
Not really. Run exim as a satellite system from imap and it only
kicks in if you send mail.
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson [EMAIL
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:10:36 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Explain what validates said non-issues?
Uhm, no. I have explained them already. The onus is on you to explain
why they are nothing more than paranoid and not valid concerns and problems.
And what business does a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 11:48:19PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Explain what validates said non-issues?
Uhm, no. I have explained them already. The onus is on you to explain
why they are nothing more than paranoid and not valid concerns and
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:58:57 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You never gave any explaination at all as to why they would be an
issue, just made a paranoid statement that everybody flat dismissed
and claimed it as fact.
I did give an explanation. Work mail must originate from a
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 00:02:31 -0700
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Those aren't standards yet. And the only thing I see there is an
awknowledgement that there are mailers currently in use that do the
wrong thing, not that it's the right thing to do.
And you still haven't cited
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 12:02:31AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
You never gave any explaination at all as to why they would be an
issue, just made a paranoid statement that everybody flat dismissed
and claimed it as fact.
I did give an
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
On Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 10:49:01PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Faster if you know the options by memory.
That's true but memory is expensive ;-).
Its the quality, not the quantity that concerns me - latency is a tad
high (on the order of
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 00:09:05 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can understand the whole personal mail not on business servers, but
what's wrong with the other way around? I don't see anything
ethically or legally questionable about that. If it puts you in a
legally questionable
On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 12:21, Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:55:16AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Which brings me to a question. Hey, all you Debian Developers! Do
you put the fact you're a DD on your resume?
Yes. It's a significant part of my free-time work and experience,
On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 06:16, Colin Watson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:41:24AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2335 +0200]:
Er, no, the .rpm - .deb direction is distinctly useful, not to mention
required for LSB compliance ...
Jesse Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I also find that a local MTA on a laptop is great. I have a local
network which grabs my email from several sources and sorts it, then
every other machine on the network can access that email via imaps.
My laptop is configured to periodically check to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 01:05:32AM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
Ok so I was very wrong about this. I think this is very useful.
What I meant is that if I go on the road with my laptop, I can connect
to a net connection there and use the smtp
Hi!
[Finally I must join this thread now.]
On Sat Jul 19, 2003 at 01:05:32AM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
This argument just doesn't make it. Mutt does filtering (shouldn't
Where does mutt filter you messages? With what setting?
procmail be doing this). Mutt does IMAP and POP (shouldn't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 07:43:31AM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
procmail be doing this). Mutt does IMAP and POP (shouldn't fetchmail
ad IMAP: A MUA has to support IMAP or IMAP would be another POP. IMAP
mails belongs on the server side and
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:37:45 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whereas if you're running an MTA, you don't have to worry about
whatever network you're already on having one.
Uh, if we're talking smarthost, yeah, you do. Where do you think that
smarthost forwards mail to?
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
Bijan Soleymani said on Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 02:06:18PM -0400:
I really don't see a valid argument for MTA/MDA/MUA on a PC-type
one-user workstation. Especially on a laptop. When MUAs support IMAP and
POP they should go the extra inch and support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:24:00PM -0400, nori heikkinen wrote:
oh, i see what you mean. but that will only work locally, right?
right now i read my email off xterms from one machine, while using a
browser local to another.
guess i'm SOL?
It's
also sprach Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.17.0219 +0200]:
*normally* listening to port 25 . . .are you saying that when fetchmail
is explicitly configured to invoke an MDA in /etc/fetchmailrc, that
MDA is briefly listening on port 25 until it's done receiving from
fetchmail, and
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.17.1048 +0200]:
It's 2003 and people still don't know what the -C and -X flags do
in SSH?
Guess what: X-forwarding over a Dual ISDN line from a host 8 hops
away in another country isn't that much fun. That's where my
mailserver is wrt my
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:35:08AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Also, cron is a required component of the system, which depends on an MTA.
How else is it going to give users output? Osmosis? Telepathy?
Log files?
They're not user readable.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:41:24AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2335 +0200]:
Er, no, the .rpm - .deb direction is distinctly useful, not to mention
required for LSB compliance ...
... which Debian has achieved since when?
We're not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:23:50PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Exactly. That's my point. You don't use a Web User Agent which has to
access the remote sites through a Web Transport Agent, do you? You *can*,
it's called a proxy server but even
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 03:25:13AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Procmail to filter each address off, mutt send-hooks to check the
address it was sent to and reply with that address. Talking five
minutes with google.
What about Bcc: ?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 03:25:13 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They're not user readable.
Hmmm, they're readable to the user who needs to read them.
Procmail to filter each address off, mutt send-hooks to check the
address it was sent to and reply with that address. Talking
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 03:43:49 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, via caching proxy is the nearly universally encouraged
method of web browsing. Really cuts back on the costs of running a
website and the bandwidth used to access them.
Which does not invalidate my point
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 05:08:55PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
productivity by factors! Aside, xbuffy can do it all for you if you
wish.
I'd never heard of the buffy/biffy/biff programs before. I've found gbuffy and
xbuffy. I'm wondering if there's an equivalent to these which will site
also sprach Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.17.1739 +0200]:
Whereas my switching from Mutt to a GUI application raised mine by
factors because I didn't have to deal with the trouble of
configuring it to my required setup. Also you missed the point.
Even if I weren't writing a message I
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 18:45:38 +0200
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The UNIX philosophy says: xbuffy!
Every little task does not have to be in a separate binary. Esp. when
that binary can't really take input.
Aside, xbuffy can do it all for you if you wish.
Free blindness
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 10:20:19AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 18:45:38 +0200 martin f krafft wrote:
You see what you, and others, seem to forget about the Unix philosophy is
that at it's core are these words:
The right tool for the job.
I don't think we've forgot that at
also sprach Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.17.1920 +0200]:
The UNIX philosophy says: xbuffy!
Every little task does not have to be in a separate binary. Esp.
when that binary can't really take input.
Whatever, I don't need to argue this. I love xbuffy.
Erm, be readable for one
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 11:44:44 -0600
Jamin W. Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They have been refuted, you simply choose not to accept that. We've
been through this already. You simply choose to interpret things
completely differently.
No, they have not. No one has refuted that having a
--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 11:44:44AM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
They have been refuted, you simply choose not to accept that. We've
been through this already. You simply choose to interpret things
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:37:49 +0200
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mine does that just fine. I click on it with the left mouse button,
and mutt pops open
So you have multiple instances of mutt going all the time? That seems
wasteful to me.
top - 19:32:46 up 104 days, 4:57, 1
Bijan Soleymani said on Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 02:06:18PM -0400:
I really don't see a valid argument for MTA/MDA/MUA on a PC-type
one-user workstation. Especially on a laptop. When MUAs support IMAP and
POP they should go the extra inch and support SMTP smarthosts.
I've found a local MTA on a
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
top - 19:32:46 up 104 days, 4:57, 1 user, load average: 0.01, 0.02,
0.05
Tasks: 299 total, 1 running, 295 sleeping, 3 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 0.2% user, 2.7% system, 0.0% nice, 97.1% idle
Mem: 2068748k total, 2043068k
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Guess what: X-forwarding over a Dual ISDN line from a host 8 hops
away in another country isn't that much fun. That's where my
mailserver is wrt my current position.
Not a problem, likely. Set the mailserver up to use mozilla
-remote... the only
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:26:36PM -0600, Gary Hennigan wrote:
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
top - 19:32:46 up 104 days, 4:57, 1 user, load average: 0.01, 0.02,
0.05
Tasks: 299 total, 1 running, 295 sleeping, 3 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 0.2% user, 2.7%
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 12:37:44 -0500
Nathan E Norman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Er, what version of procps? Doesn't work here; I've got 2.0.7-8 (and
a non-i36 arch but I hope that doesn't matter).
ii procps 3.1.9-1The /proc file system utilities
Not sure when it started doing
Nathan E Norman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 12:26:36PM -0600, Gary Hennigan wrote:
[snip]
Man, I *REALLY* wanted to avoid this thread! ;) But a legitimate
question deserves an answer...
Hit 1 while in top and it'll display the CPU info seperately.
Er, what version of
also sprach Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.17.2012 +0200]:
Mine does that just fine. I click on it with the left mouse button,
and mutt pops open
So you have multiple instances of mutt going all the time? That seems
wasteful to me.
No, just when I need them. Aside, the memory
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 06:08, MJM wrote:
On Tuesday 15 July 2003 23:07, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 05:14:08PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote:
Please let's not start a flamewar. I won't cc you anymore since
you read the lists all of the time.
Better yet, don't CC unless
also sprach Joerg Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.0919 +0200]:
I tried that, but I hate vim being the default editor, setting it
to xemacs caused problems in my xterm. Furthermore I use pop/smtp
to get/sen my emails via a freemail provider, and I did not want
to mess around with exim
* martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030716 00:51]:
also sprach Joerg Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.0919 +0200]:
I tried that, but I hate vim being the default editor, setting it
to xemacs caused problems in my xterm. Furthermore I use pop/smtp
to get/sen my emails via a freemail
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 09:31, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Joerg Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.0919
+0200]:
I tried that, but I hate vim being the default editor, setting it
to xemacs caused problems in my xterm. Furthermore I use pop/smtp
to get/sen my emails via a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 09:19:20AM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
Furthermore I use pop/smtp to get/sen my emails via a freemail
provider, and I did not want to mess around with exim co. to send
mail.
Fetchmail is super-easy as is exim. If you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:01:47AM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
And kmail has one major advantage: I can read mails
with over-long lines without problems...
So can mutt, but the ultimate solution is to tell your correspondants
not to send email in
also sprach Vineet Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.0956 +0200]:
It can? Afaik, mutt doesn't speak smtp. It does pop and imap.
Well, you might be right. I think I had a patched version then...
Actually, recently I've been using it with local maildirs
synchronized via offlineimap, which
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:19:20 +0200
Joerg Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried that, but I hate vim being the default editor, setting it to
xemacs caused problems in my xterm. Furthermore I use pop/smtp to
get/sen my emails via a freemail provider, and I did not want to mess
around with
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 01:14:52 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:01:47AM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
And kmail has one major advantage: I can read mails
with over-long lines without problems...
So can mutt, but the ultimate solution is to tell your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:42:49AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
So can mutt, but the ultimate solution is to tell your correspondants
not to send email in a retarded manner.
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 22:03:15 -0700
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In fact Sylpheed-claws' reply on a list message defaults to
reply-to-list.
It has a reply-to-sender for list mail to which you want to reply
directly to the sender. Very sane, IMHO.
This is also in Sylpheed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:39:53AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Not in my view. I never understood why people have such a woody on having
an MTA on a machine that most likely doesn't need it. The mail client is
perfectly capable, or at least
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:14:42 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because it's pointless and un-necissary to impliment the better part
of an MTA into an MUA.
Which is why you don't do that. Smarthost doesn't need a full blown MTA
to do it. This is smarthost behavior. Here are the
also sprach Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1042 +0200]:
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1013 +0200]:
Fetchmail is super-easy as is exim. If you can't find the example
config in /usr/share/doc/fetchmail/examples and don't understand
eximconfig, I've really got to question how you managed to make it
past the installer.
also sprach Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1435 +0200]:
Lookup DNS
Connect
Process
That doesn't look like an MTA to me.
it does to me. it's only the smtp side, smtpd is not implemented.
--
Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them!
.''`. martin f. krafft
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:05:37 +0100
Richard Kimber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 22:03:15 -0700
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In fact Sylpheed-claws' reply on a list message defaults to
reply-to-list.
It has a reply-to-sender for list mail to which you want to
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 14:45:46 +0200
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also sprach Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1435 +0200]:
Lookup DNS
Connect
Process
That doesn't look like an MTA to me.
it does to me. it's only the smtp side, smtpd is not implemented.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:03:12AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
I nominate offlineimap for the Tool of the Year 2003 Award!
Offlineimpa had severe problems with defunct threads last I saw, and yes
I filed a bug report on it. Sadly, it got passed around with nothing
coming of it last I
also sprach Jamin W. Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1653 +0200]:
Offlineimpa had severe problems with defunct threads last I saw, and yes
I filed a bug report on it. Sadly, it got passed around with nothing
coming of it last I checked.
What's a defunct thread? I am using it now for a
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:07:59PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
Jamin W. Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1653 +0200]:
Offlineimpa had severe problems with defunct threads last I saw, and
yes I filed a bug report on it. Sadly, it got passed around with
nothing coming of it last I
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:07:54 -0400
Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is also in Sylpheed itself.
Really? Did you have to do anything funky to get that functionality,
or did it just come with the version in sid? (I note you're running
0.9.3; I'm on 0.8.2) I run sylpheed, am
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:41:56PM +0100, Richard Kimber wrote:
I don't use the Debian packages. I download the src and just compile it.
It always compiles for me without problem. No doubt I would make my own
debs if I knew how, but I've always
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 02:40:50PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
fetchmail requires you to have an MDA configured, which may well be
beyond the average user.
Wait, since when? I ran fetchmail *long* before I ran procmail...
- --
.''`. Paul
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 00:33, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
| I use KMail - is it being lame?
Yes. Or, possibly, it has a list reply feature that you haven't found
yet. I can't say for certain because I don't use it.
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 03:19, Joerg Johannes wrote:
I use kmail
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:41:56 +0100
Richard Kimber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't use the Debian packages. I download the src and just compile it.
It always compiles for me without problem. No doubt I would make my own
debs if I knew how, but I've always found the documentation on this
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 11:55, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:41:56PM +0100, Richard Kimber wrote:
I don't use the Debian packages. I download the src and just compile it.
It always compiles for me without problem. No doubt I would make my own
debs if I knew how, but I've
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 12:14:34PM -0400, MJM wrote:
application. More PITA. So my thinking is that KDE, Gnome, and others like
them are too much stuff too tightly integrated with too many test cases for
even the OS community. I want to return to 1993 and reclaim some reliability
and
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1755 +0200]:
Yeah, I'd love it if there was something more in the form of a concise
HOWTO. If there is one, I haven't found it but would love to be
proven wrong. God knows I would package everything I compile on my
own and throw up my
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1756 +0200]:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 02:40:50PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
fetchmail requires you to have an MDA configured, which may well be
beyond the average user.
Wait, since when? I ran fetchmail *long* before I ran
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 08:55:16AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Which brings me to a question. Hey, all you Debian Developers! Do
you put the fact you're a DD on your resume?
Yes. It's a significant part of my free-time work and experience, so it
deserves to be there. I suspect it may have been
--sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:19:02PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1756 +0200]:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at
also sprach MJM [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1819 +0200]:
Go around your arse to scratch your elbow method: build an RPM
and use alien to make a .deb from the .rpm.
NO! do it right!
--
Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them!
.''`. martin f. krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED]
also sprach Emma Jane Hogbin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1827 +0200]:
If you are thinking about replacements for KDE and Gnome you may want to
check out: Fluxbox and/or Blackbox (fluxbox is based on blackbox).
http://fluxbox.sf.net
http://blackboxwm.sourceforge.net/
or:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:14:52AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:01:47AM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
And kmail has one major advantage: I can read mails
with over-long lines without problems...
So can mutt, but the ultimate solution is to tell your correspondants
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 12:14:34PM -0400, MJM wrote:
| I checked KMail for the possibility of accessing more than one smtp host - my
| version (standard Debian stable package of KDE) seems to support only one
| host.
This is normal. In practice you don't really need to send mail out
through
on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 02:40:06PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
also sprach Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1042 +0200]:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:10:50PM -0400, nori heikkinen wrote:
on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 02:40:06PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
also sprach Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1042 +0200]:
also sprach nori heikkinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2110 +0200]:
also sprach Derrick 'dman' Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2057 +0200]:
| So I would have to set up more than one user account to access more
| than one smtp host. I have one ISP and many various POP accounts
POP != SMTP. I suspect that KMail can retrieve from multiple POP
accounts,
on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:56:36PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
also sprach nori heikkinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2110 +0200]:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:24:00PM -0400, nori heikkinen wrote:
on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:56:36PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
then hit ctrl-b in the index or while viewing the message.
oh, i see what you mean. but that will only work locally, right?
right now i read my email off
* nori heikkinen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030716 13:24]:
on Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:56:36PM +0200, martin f krafft insinuated:
also sprach nori heikkinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2110 +0200]:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:35:08AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
| On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:14:42 -0700
| Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Because it's pointless and un-necissary to impliment the better part
| of an MTA into an MUA.
|
| Which is why you don't do that. Smarthost doesn't need a
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:00:57PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
| I remember having fetchmail deliver my mail to /dev/null after having
| misconfigured my MTA. I installed one of those Sending Only MTAs to
| use with mutt, and didn't realize that meant that fetchmail would pass
| it the mail and
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:42:49AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
| On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 01:14:52 -0700
| Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:01:47AM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
| And kmail has one major advantage: I can read mails
| with over-long lines without
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 13:44, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach MJM [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1819 +0200]:
Go around your arse to scratch your elbow method: build an RPM
and use alien to make a .deb from the .rpm.
NO! do it right!
I wasn't serious, but after skimming the package
also sprach nori heikkinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2224 +0200]:
oh, i see what you mean. but that will only work locally, right?
right now i read my email off xterms from one machine, while using a
browser local to another.
from url_handlers.sh:
# Any entry in the lists of programs
also sprach MJM [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2306 +0200]:
I wasn't serious, but after skimming the package maintainers guide
to see what the right way is I can see why alien would not be
liked. Why on earth did the people deciding what packages to
include allow the alien package to be
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 05:06:15PM -0400, MJM wrote:
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 13:44, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach MJM [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.1819 +0200]:
Go around your arse to scratch your elbow method: build an RPM
and use alien to make a .deb from the .rpm.
NO! do it
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:45:40 -0400
Derrick 'dman' Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As Martin points out, the Process step you listed is a concise way
of describing the job of an MTA. The details of Process are defined
in RFC 821, superseded by RFC 2821.
The details of process is quite
also sprach Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.07.16.2335 +0200]:
Er, no, the .rpm - .deb direction is distinctly useful, not to mention
required for LSB compliance ...
... which Debian has achieved since when?
In fact, let me rephrase: are we ever going to be LSB-compliant?
--
Please do
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:23:50PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Processing boils down to this:
You lose connection, error condition.
You get a 5xx error, error condition.
You get a 4xx error, error condition.
In all cases fail the message, set it aside and wait for the user to
decide.
WRONG!
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
