Re: Procmail recipe to fetch gpg keys?
Moin, On 00-12-17, Lance Simmons wrote: A day or two ago, someone on this list mentioned setting up a procmail recipe to have gpg get keys automatically. Does anyone have an example of such a recipe? I asked for it a few ago. The trick is to let GPG do it. Put set pgp_getkeys_command="" in your .muttrc and keyserver wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net in your .gnupg/options. Thorsten
Re: Procmail recipe to fetch gpg keys?
Moin, On 00-12-18, Joe Philipps wrote: I'm curious...do users usually use a separate keyring for things like the Mutt list? Not yet, but I like the idea. Most of the messages I read have gpg complain about the veracity of the key used to verify the signature, as well I suppose they should because I haven't signed them. You don't have to sign them, only to acknowledge their validity. For example, I would acknowledge any keys signed by 'ct magazine CERTIFICATE', because I know how nitpicky they are. The thing is, I probably don't want to sign them because other than trusting the keyserver, I cannot verify (well, would find it difficult to verify) the individual keys. You don't have to sign them only to add them to your ring. Just add them. The reason I might want to have a separate ring (e.g., --keyring mutt-users.gpg) is that it would keep them off my "main" keyring Jepp. Saves time and is easies to manage. On a related issue, your key is not on the servers: - - - [-- PGP-Ausgabe folgt (aktuelle Zeit: Mon Dec 18 09:50:15 2000) --] gpg: Unterschrift vom Mon 18 Dez 2000 06:29:09 CET, DSA Schlüssel ID FA029353 gpg: Schlüssels FA029353 von wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net wird angefordert ... gpg: Schlüssel FA029353: Öffentlicher Schlüssel importiert gpg: Anzahl insgesamt bearbeiteter Schlüssel: 1 gpg:importiert: 1 gpg: FALSCHE Unterschrift von "Joe Philipps (Philipps family sig) [EMAIL PROTECTED]" [-- Ende der PGP-Ausgabe --] - - - (The important line is the last one saying 'WRONG signature from (...)'.) What's wrong? On another related issue: I failed to add this address to my key. This should be fixed now. Thorsten PGP signature
feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
hi often i get mails that i would like to be reminded of later. like i get a mail from my girlfriend in the morning that i should fetch something on the way home in the evening. but in the evening that mail has been scrolled way off the screen and is lost between tons of more or less important stuff. is there a way in mutt to get reminded of that mail later or does anybody know a local mail bouncer daemon that delays delivery for a (by header or subject) configurable time ? dont tell me about mix cascades. i don't want to set up a whole mix just for delaying. and i don't want to send every mail offsite. and an internal mutt solution (like in a special follow-up-folder) would be nicer anyway since you could still access that mails whenever you liked to. i know that this feature would be very usefull in an office environment too. e.g. somebody sends you a mail and you have to call him to clarify something. you try but that sucker isn't in his office. just queue that mail for resubmission in half an hour. would be nice, wouldn't it? -heinrich ps: i'm no on the list so please cc to me. -- Heinrich Langos [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp: http://wh9.tu-dresden.de/~heinrich/pub_pgp_key.asc _ |o| The reason we come up with new versions is not to fix bugs. |o| |o| It's absolutely not. It's the stupidest reason to buy a new |o| |o| version I ever heard. -- Bill Gates, Microsoft Corporation |o| ~
Re: feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
One thing you could do is to use the "important" flag and try to get a habit of looking at the flagged messages from time to time. You could even write a little shell script which basically greps for "X-Status:.*F", and regularly reminds you that you have important mail sitting in your inbox. -- Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
Heinrich Langos proclaimed on mutt-users that: like i get a mail from my girlfriend in the morning that i should fetch something on the way home in the evening. but in the evening that mail has been scrolled way off the screen and is lost between tons of more or less important stuff. Wouldn't procmailing mails from your girlfriend, your co-workers etc etc into separate folders help? ;) What you are suggesting seems to be the job of sendmail + procmail, imho. You _could_ bounce the mail to an alias which calls a script for doing this ... ps: i'm no on the list so please cc to me. done -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI Turnaucka's Law: The attention span of a computer is only as long as its electrical cord.
Re: feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 01:38:15PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote: One thing you could do is to use the "important" flag and try to get a habit of looking at the flagged messages from time to time. that would mean that all falagged messages would show up all the time.. You could even write a little shell script which basically greps for "X-Status:.*F", and regularly reminds you that you have important mail sitting in your inbox. i would have to write back the inbox regularly than. hmm -heinrich -- Heinrich Langos [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp: http://wh9.tu-dresden.de/~heinrich/pub_pgp_key.asc _ |o| The reason we come up with new versions is not to fix bugs. |o| |o| It's absolutely not. It's the stupidest reason to buy a new |o| |o| version I ever heard. -- Bill Gates, Microsoft Corporation |o| ~
Re: feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
Hi, On 00-12-18, Heinrich Langos wrote: is there a way in mutt to get reminded of that mail later or does anybody know a local mail bouncer daemon that delays delivery for a (by header or subject) configurable time ? You could tell Procmail to put out an at(1) job. Or make a makro to do this if your so's order are not easy to identify.
Re: feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 06:34:45PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: Wouldn't procmailing mails from your girlfriend, your co-workers etc etc into separate folders help? ;) not realy ... since i wouldn't reread old mail if not reminded. not even mail from my girl :-) What you are suggesting seems to be the job of sendmail + procmail, imho. You _could_ bounce the mail to an alias which calls a script for doing this ... yes .. i am thinking bout that .. but that would put the delayed mails out of my reach for some time. maybe i should save those mails to a special folder and let a cronjob go through it. finding a mail that was due to resubmission it would bounce that mail to me, and delete it from the folder. question is how to embed the time in the saved mail. still a sollution inside mutt would be better for synchronization and other reasons. ps: i'm no on the list so please cc to me. done i'm on the list now. -heinrich -- Heinrich Langos [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp: http://wh9.tu-dresden.de/~heinrich/pub_pgp_key.asc _ |o| The reason we come up with new versions is not to fix bugs. |o| |o| It's absolutely not. It's the stupidest reason to buy a new |o| |o| version I ever heard. -- Bill Gates, Microsoft Corporation |o| ~
Re: feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:46:14AM +0100, Heinrich Langos wrote: and an internal mutt solution (like in a special follow-up-folder) would be nicer anyway since you could still access that mails whenever you liked to. I use mutt in combination with procmail and xbuffy. If I need to remind myself of a mail, I flag that message as new and save it in a special folder -- done with a macro. Rest is taken care by xbuffy. Further, xbuffy is "omnipresent" in my window manager and a middle click launches mutt. Here are sample mutt macros: # line breaks for clarity macro index "" ":set noresolve\r:set noconfirmcreate\rwN :set resolve\rs\r:set confirmcreate\r" macro pager "" ":set noresolve\r:set noconfirmcreate\rN :set resolve\rs\r:set confirmcreate\r" Here, the mail is saved in $mbox. You can choose yours. resolve is turned off to prevent advancement of cursor when we turn the 'new' flag on. It is turned back on later. I also use nosave_empty. Hence the confirmcreate stuff. Regards Sankar -- Sankaranarayanan K. V. | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Motorola India Electronics Ltd | http://www.mot.com/miel
Re: feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 07:29:42PM +0530, Sankaranarayanan K V wrote: I use mutt in combination with procmail and xbuffy. If I need to remind myself of a mail, I flag that message as new and save it in a special folder -- done with a macro. Rest is taken care by xbuffy. Further, xbuffy is "omnipresent" in my window manager and a middle click launches mutt. That special folder should be put in 'mailboxes' also. You can cycle through folders and see your girlfriend's mail whenever you want. BTW, I also use 'set nomark_old'. Regards Sankar -- Sankaranarayanan K. V. | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Motorola India Electronics Ltd | http://www.mot.com/miel
Line length and word wrapping
I have a problem with my line length and word wrapping. I'm not sure where the configurations are in the muttrc but if someone could help me I would appreciate it (and I'm sure everyone else I write to would also). Jeff
Re: feature-request: delayed resubmission, follow-up
On 2000-12-18 14:25:41 +0100, Heinrich Langos wrote: On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 01:38:15PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote: One thing you could do is to use the "important" flag and try to get a habit of looking at the flagged messages from time to time. that would mean that all falagged messages would show up all the time.. Yes. If I got your message right, you belong to those people who have a gigantic inbox where everything piles up. Now, the idea is that you use mutt's limit feature regularly and have a look at what kind of flagged messages you have there. You could even write a little shell script which basically greps for "X-Status:.*F", and regularly reminds you that you have important mail sitting in your inbox. i would have to write back the inbox regularly than. hmm This is, of course, a matter of taste. You could also just pop up an xmessage window telling you that you have so-and-so many flagged messages. -- Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Line length and word wrapping
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 09:15:29AM -0500, Jeffrey A Schoolcraft wrote: I have a problem with my line length and word wrapping. I'm not sure where the configurations are in the muttrc but if someone could help me I would appreciate it (and I'm sure everyone else I write to would also). Yes, you certainly do. :-) You should deal with that in your editor, not in mutt. There has been discussion of how to do this in vim on this list; you might check the archives. -- -- C^2 No windows were crashed in the making of this email. Looking for fine software and/or web pages? http://w3.trib.com/~ccurley PGP signature
Re: Line length and word wrapping
Jeffrey A Schoolcraft proclaimed on mutt-users that: I have a problem with my line length and word wrapping. I'm not sure where the configurations are in the muttrc but if someone could help me I would appreciate it (and I'm sure everyone else I write to would also). The config is in your .vimrc, .exrc (or whatever editor you use for mutt) -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI The joys of love made her human and the agonies of love destroyed her. -- Spock, "Requiem for Methuselah", stardate 5842.8
Re: Line length and word wrapping
I'm pretty sure that I've fixed my line length word prolem. If someone could just post back and say yes or not I would appreciate it. Thanks. Jeff * Jeffrey A Schoolcraft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I have a problem with my line length and word wrapping. I'm not sure where the configurations are in the muttrc but if someone could help me I would appreciate it (and I'm sure everyone else I write to would also). Jeff
Re: Line length and word wrapping
On 2000-12-18 09:15:29 -0500, Jeffrey A Schoolcraft wrote: I have a problem with my line length and word wrapping. I'm not sure where the configurations are in the muttrc but if someone could help me I would appreciate it (and I'm sure everyone else I write to would also). :-) It's nothing you can configure with mutt proper - it's a property of the editor you use. If it's vi, look at the wrapmargin variable. -- Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: special reply_regexp
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 08:53:49PM +0100, Josh Huber wrote: Is this necessary? I'm using: set reply_regexp= '^(\[[a-z0-9:-]+\][ \t]*)?(re([\[0-9\]+])*|aw):[\t]*' and it's threading mailing lists of this type for me... for example: [ruby-talk:7097] Rubyize this method [ruby-talk:7099] Re: Rubyize this method [ruby-talk:7104] Re: Rubyize this method are all threaded properly. (well, not as good as messages with In-Reply-To: but better than having threads scattered all over the folder) perhaps the regex wasn't quite right? But with your regexp you cannot determine the head of the thread (w/o the Re:) like the first line of your example [ruby-talk:7097] Rubyize this method You need to add a "?" after the (re...) pattern. The regexp which finally works for me is now set reply_regexp= '^(\[[a-z0-9:-]+\][ \t]*)?((re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*)?+[ \t]*' Cu, Daniel.
Re: Automatically checking for new mail.
John Kerbawy muttered: On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:07:52AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: John Kerbawy proclaimed on mutt-users that: set mail_check=10 # how often to poll for new mail in your .muttrc (that value is in minutes). ah, the value is in minutes. I was using that variable, but I figured it was seconds for some reason. According to the manual John is right: 6.3.75. mail_check Type: number Default: 5 This variable configures how often (in seconds) mutt should look for new mail. ^^ HTH, Michael -- I've never been canoeing before, but I imagine there must be just a few simple heuristics you have to remember... Yes, don't fall out, and don't hit rocks. PGP-Key: http://www-stud.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/~tatgeml/public.key
bulk mailing
Can anyone out there tell me if it is possible to send many email's out using Bcc from mutt? I have tried to cut and paste the email addresses i the appropriate place when composing mail but no joy, the mailer manages to put in two and then put a few in the subject line and the rest in the message body. Also is there any kind of address book I can use with mutt. I have had trouble subscribing to this list so please mail me directly. Many thanks for your time John-Mark
Re: Automatically checking for new mail.
Michael Tatge proclaimed on mutt-users that: On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:07:52AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: in your .muttrc (that value is in minutes). This variable configures how often (in seconds) mutt should look for new mail. ^^ mea culpa :( --suresh
Re: special reply_regexp
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 04:20:28PM +0100, Daniel Kollar wrote: But with your regexp you cannot determine the head of the thread (w/o the Re:) like the first line of your example [ruby-talk:7097] Rubyize this method You need to add a "?" after the (re...) pattern. The regexp which finally works for me is now set reply_regexp= '^(\[[a-z0-9:-]+\][ \t]*)?((re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*)?+[ \t]*' That's interesting, because the one I posted works fine for me, and the default mutt reply_regexp doesn't do what you suggest: Default: "^(re([\[0-9\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*" I assumed the reply regexp was applied to the subject, and the matched text is removed, then the resultant string is compared with other subjects. If this is true (is it not?), then you shouldn't have to conditionalize the re portion of the subject. -- Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 1024D/6B21489A 61F0 6138 BE7B FEBF A223 E9D1 BFE1 2065 6B21 489A PGP signature
Re: bulk mailing
jmj@charm proclaimed on mutt-users that: Can anyone out there tell me if it is possible to send many email's out using Bcc from mutt? yes - but you'd be better off creating a sendmail alias and using that. Also is there any kind of address book I can use with mutt. set alias_file=~/.mail_aliases # where I keep my aliases There you are. I have had trouble subscribing to this list so please mail me directly. Many thanks for your time John-Mark -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI Remember that whatever misfortune may be your lot, it could only be worse in Cleveland. -- National Lampoon, "Deteriorata"
Re: special reply_regexp
Moin, On 00-12-18, Josh Huber wrote: [-- PGP-Ausgabe folgt (aktuelle Zeit: Mon Dec 18 19:26:05 2000) --] gpg: Unterschrift vom Mon 18 Dez 2000 17:59:07 CET, DSA Schlüssel ID 6B21489A gpg: FALSCHE Unterschrift von "Josh Huber [EMAIL PROTECTED]" [-- Ende der PGP-Ausgabe --] That would be: gpg: WRONG signature from "Josh Huber [EMAIL PROTECTED]" Thorsten PGP signature
Re: Own header
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 08:05:25PM -0600, Gottipati Aravind wrote: So, I guess my question would be how do I get mutt to not generate its default (Content-Type) header.. or make mutt recognize my header and respect it? From the Compose Menu, you can edit the Content-Type by typing CTRL-T. If your Content-Type header is always the same, you could write a macro to change the Content-Type header before sending the message. E.g., something like this: macro compose Y ^T^Umycontenttype\nsend-message which also sends the message. -- Gary Johnson | Agilent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] | RF Communications Product Generation Unit | Spokane, Washington, USA
[solved] help: high bit chars turned to '?'
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 01:44:36PM -0500, Maciej Kalisiak wrote: Can someone suggest a method of tracking down this problem? I have a few emails in my mailbox which contain iso8859-2 characters, but Mutt insists on displaying them all as '?'. Is this a configuration option I have misset somewhere? After updating my mutt Debian package to 1.2.5-5, and setting LC_CTYPE="en_CA.ISO-8859-2" (I live in Canada, but often converse in Polish, which requires that charset) did the trick for me. It appears there were some funky thinks recently in the Debian locale packages, which I found out about by browsing the Debian bug list for the "mutt" package. I think someone else mentioned that they had the same problem, so hopefully this will fix it for him/her too. -- Maciej Kalisiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.dgp.toronto.edu/~mac
where to readup on locale/NLS?
For the most part I use the North American flavour of things (i.e., not i18n), but occasionally I recieve and send emails in iso-8859-2 charset. After much frustrating experimentation, setting LC_CTYPE to "en_CA.ISO-8859-2" gets me the proper charset in mutt. This works (I get Latin-2 chars when needed, but text is in english), but some other apps complain about this wierd mix of charset and locale. So I would like to read up on this stuff (locale, NLS, charmaps, etc.). Can anyone recommend any beginner/intro stuff on this stuff? Online URLs preferred. Also if anyone can point out a better way to do what I want above, that'd be great too. Thanks -- Maciej Kalisiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.dgp.toronto.edu/~mac
Re: Procmail recipe to fetch gpg keys?
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 10:11:07AM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: Moin, On 00-12-18, Joe Philipps wrote: You don't have to sign them, only to acknowledge their validity. For example, I would acknowledge any keys signed by 'ct magazine CERTIFICATE', because I know how nitpicky they are. wel.I can think of two ways to get rid of the lack of verified key message (the goal): use a bunch of trusted-key statements either in options or on the command line, or sign each key w/ my key. It's more of a "reduction of annoyance factor" than a truly important program issue. The thing is, I probably don't want to sign them because other than trusting the keyserver, I cannot verify (well, would find it difficult to verify) the individual keys. You don't have to sign them only to add them to your ring. Just add them. It's not so much the "add to keyring" that's the problem; it's the message warning me about the fact that the signature has questionable validity. On a related issue, your key is not on the servers: - - - [-- PGP-Ausgabe folgt (aktuelle Zeit: Mon Dec 18 09:50:15 2000) --] gpg: Unterschrift vom Mon 18 Dez 2000 06:29:09 CET, DSA Schlüssel ID FA029353 gpg: Schlüssels FA029353 von wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net wird angefordert ... gpg: Schlüssel FA029353: Öffentlicher Schlüssel importiert gpg: Anzahl insgesamt bearbeiteter Schlüssel: 1 gpg:importiert: 1 gpg: FALSCHE Unterschrift von "Joe Philipps (Philipps family sig) [EMAIL PROTECTED]" [-- Ende der PGP-Ausgabe --] - - - (The important line is the last one saying 'WRONG signature from (...)'.) What's wrong? First, sorry, the only language I understand is English, and I've had 4 years of Spanish study (meaning I'm not exactly fluent but I understand it some). I'm guessing that's German in your GPG message. uI've submitted to several, I thought to wwwkeys.us.pgp.net, which I thought shared keys with the other ones. What the heck...it can't hurt if I submit it to a few more :-). It should be on keyserver.net (the one in my .sig block). You should also be able to get it "manually" by downloading it from the Web site listed in my .sig block. Beyond that, I don't know if there's a transport problem or maybe a content encoding problem. I'd like it if someone could then help me track that down, please. So that people with plain text mailers would have an easier time verifying my emails, I usually have put on the "traditional" option(s). But these days I'm paying more attention to that statement in the manual about this format being deprecated :^) :^). Something might be messed up since I switched back? Didn't undo all those configurations? On another related issue: I failed to add this address to my key. This should be fixed now. Thorsten -- Oo---o, Oo---o, O-weem-oh-wum-ooo-ayyy In the jungle, the silicon jungle, the process sleeps tonight. Joe Philipps [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.philippsfamily.org/Joe/ public PGP/GPG key 0xFA029353 available via http://www.keyserver.net PGP signature
Re: Procmail recipe to fetch gpg keys?
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 03:41:35PM -0500, Joe Philipps wrote: wel.I can think of two ways to get rid of the lack of verified key message (the goal): use a bunch of trusted-key statements either in options or on the command line, or sign each key w/ my key. It's more of a "reduction of annoyance factor" than a truly important program issue. Ah, you wouldn't want to sign everyone's keys, as you shouldn't sign a key unless you trust that person. But perhaps a local signature? maybe that is what they're used for (--lsign-key with gpg) option(s). But these days I'm paying more attention to that statement in the manual about this format being deprecated :^) :^). Something might be messed up since I switched back? Didn't undo all those configurations? I had no problems verifying your signature, just so you know. -- Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 1024D/6B21489A 61F0 6138 BE7B FEBF A223 E9D1 BFE1 2065 6B21 489A PGP signature
Re: Line length and word wrapping
* Jeffrey A Schoolcraft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I have a problem with my line length and word wrapping. I'm not sure where the configurations are in the muttrc but if someone could help me I would appreciate it (and I'm sure everyone else I write to would also). I just changed my editor entry to: # editor set editor='vim "+set tw=73"' This automatically sets a 73 column textwrap in vim, so that I no longer have to pipe all my email paragraphs through fmt. However, I just noticed that if I go back and type on a line, it doesn't automatically re-wrap the line, so it looks like I still do have to format it through fmt. :/ anyhow... Mike -- Mike Erickson mee(at)quidquam.com http://www.quidquam.com/ "The more noise a man or a motor makes the less power there is available." - W. R. McGeary
Re: Line length and word wrapping
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 03:58:21PM -0800, Mike E wrote: set editor='vim "+set tw=73"' This automatically sets a 73 column textwrap in vim, so that I no longer have to pipe all my email paragraphs through fmt. However, I just noticed that if I go back and type on a line, it doesn't automatically re-wrap the line, so it looks like I still do have to format it through fmt. :/ There's no really good way (i.e., none that I like) to automatically reformat paragraphs within vim, but there are some things you can do to make it easier. For example, you can use vim's internal formatter to reformat the current paragraph by typing gqip Or, if you prefer to use fmt, you can put something like this in your .vimrc: au BufNewFile,BufRead,BufEnter *set equalprg= au BufNewFile,BufRead,BufEnter /tmp/mutt-* set equalprg=fmt and reformat the current paragraph with =ip Of course you can use object/motion commands other than "ip", but you get the idea. Gary -- Gary Johnson | Agilent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] | RF Communications Product Generation Unit | Spokane, Washington, USA
Re: Line length and word wrapping
Gary, On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 03:58:21PM -0800, Mike E wrote: set editor='vim "+set tw=73"' This automatically sets a 73 column textwrap in vim, so that I no longer have to pipe all my email paragraphs through fmt. However, I just noticed that if I go back and type on a line, it doesn't automatically re-wrap the line, so it looks like I still do have to format it through fmt. :/ At 2000/12/18/16:48 -0800 Gary Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's no really good way (i.e., none that I like) to automatically reformat paragraphs within vim Hmmm... Maybe you'll like this. Works for either vi or vim. Define the following key mapping in .exrc or .vimrc: map } 0J071lBXi Notice that the 'i' is followed by a newline and an escape character, not by '^', 'M', '^', and '['. Then enter vi(m), position the cursor anywhere on the first line of a paragraph, and in command mode, press the '}' key repeatedly, with each press formatting the current line (which advances) so that it is not more than 72 characters long. This is my own "text-flow macro". Vary the "71" to your taste. Make it N - 1, where N is the maximum number of characters per line acceptable to you. David -- Live in a world of your own, but always welcome visitors.
address book
Is there a way to create an address book in Mutt? Like, say, when I want to list a number of recipients of a message is there a way I can open up an address book type thing and pick out the names I want the message to go to? I have looked all through the docs and haven't found anything that pertains to this. Maybe I'm looking for the wrong description or something. Thanks.
Re: Line length and word wrapping
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 08:34:37PM -0800, David Alban wrote: At 2000/12/18/16:48 -0800 Gary Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's no really good way (i.e., none that I like) to automatically reformat paragraphs within vim Hmmm... Maybe you'll like this. Works for either vi or vim. Define the following key mapping in .exrc or .vimrc: map } 0J071lBXi Then enter vi(m), position the cursor anywhere on the first line of a paragraph, and in command mode, press the '}' key repeatedly, with each press formatting the current line (which advances) so that it is not more than 72 characters long. Thanks, David. That does save a few keystrokes and would be handy when using vi. I often do something similar by first typing 'gqj' to reformat the current line and the next line, then typing '.' to repeat the operation down the page as many times as necessary. This also works for reformatting various styles of comments, including messages quoted with leading ' '. What I meant was that I haven't found a good way to have vim automatically reflow the lines of a paragraph as I type, or when changing from insert mode to command mode. I've seen ways to do it, but because vim doesn't distinguish among different paragraph types, all the techniques I've seen assume that all paragraphs should be reformatted when edited. That doesn't work very well when editing other structures such as tables. Any technique that requires that I toggle some macro mode for different paragraph types or end insert mode with a character other than Escape is, to me, more bother than just using gq when necessary. Gary -- Gary Johnson | Agilent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] | RF Communications Product Generation Unit | Spokane, Washington, USA
Re: Line length and word wrapping
Gary, At 2000/12/18/21:49 -0800 Gary Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, David. That does save a few keystrokes and would be handy when using vi. I often do something similar by first typing 'gqj' to reformat the current line and the next line, then typing '.' to repeat the operation down the page as many times as necessary. This also works for reformatting various styles of comments, including messages quoted with leading ' '. Wow. That's *much* better than what I was doing! Shows how little vim documentation I've read. :-) David -- Live in a world of your own, but always welcome visitors.
