On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 07:28:15PM -0500, David T-G wrote: > Roman -- > > ...and then Roman Neuhauser said... > % > > % > ...and then Roman Neuhauser said... > % > % > % > % is there a means to let mutt perform an action on the message it sends > % > % out _when_ it sends it? All the documented hooks take place long before > % > > % > Not AFAIK. > % > % Any plans to implement this feature? > > Not AFAIK. > > [I couldn't resist ;-] > > > % > % > % inserting of the signature until the moment the message goes off. > ... > % > temp file after the real editor completes. Note that re-editing a file > % > will cause duplicate signatures, so you might also tell your editor to > % > find the sig_dashes and delete from there down before jumping back to > % > the beginning of the message. > % > % Yeah, I figured out it'd be probably left for vim to do this. Then > > Sounds good to me. > > > % again, (I'm no vim-hacker) there are at least three ways to quit > % from vim, saving the buffer, which means I'd have to noremap all of > > Why? > > > % them... Unless I'm missing a way to avoid this. Ok, time to mail > % [EMAIL PROTECTED] :) > > I think you are. Set $editor in mutt to call vim and then append your > signature, and in the vim call instead of just > > vim +/^$ > > do some magic which jumps to "^-- $", does a delete from there to the > end, and then jumps back to the first /$^ in the file. > > > % > % > The code is left as an exercise for the reader ;-) > % > % No problem. Thanks for the reply. > > Sure thing! > Mmm, this whole signature thing is really unsolveable. For example, I am a strong believer in bottom-posting to threads, or replying in context. An automatic signature at the bottom is then fine. However these evil people who top-post mean that unless you want to complete addle the thread logic you also have to top post, in which case a sig at the end is a little weird.
Since my sig is so simple and cookie-free I can always just type it in somewhere I suppose .. :) -- Regards Cliff
