Re: wrong In-Reply-To messes up threading
Hi, * Christoph Bugel [02-06-12 11:23:05 +0200] wrote: On 2002-06-11, Rocco Rutte wrote: * Christoph Bugel [02-06-11 22:21:30 +0200] wrote: [ wrong In-Reply-To from mutt 1.2.5.x ] The problem is that mutt cannot reliably distinct between a message-id and a mail adress if both are given in angle brackets. IIRC mutt assumes that a local part of a mail address is at most 8 characters -- everything else is considered to be a message-id. I don't have a better solution. hmmm... now that you mention it, yes, I did notice something that's connected to the string's length. but still, I thought that *anything* after the In-Reply-To: is supposed to be a message-id? It depends on what RFC you claim to go conform with. Quote from RFC 2822: The Message-ID: field contains a single unique message identifier. The References: and In-Reply-To: field each contain one or more unique message identifiers, optionally separated by CFWS. The original RFC is 822 is from 1982 whereby 2822 is from 2001 which is newer than mutt 1.2.5. Compare 2822 to 822: ,[ rfc822.txt ]- | / Message-ID: msg-id | / In-Reply-To : *(phrase / msg-id) `- So it seems that from user1host1.org is not a valid thing to put after the In-Reply-To header, and since mutt-1.2.5?? does exactly that, I wonder if I'll have to live with broken threads until everyone will have stopped using mutt-1.2.5? If mutt 1.2.5 claims to be RFC822 compliant this behaviour is correct, according to 2822 it's wrong. I still see lots of people using 1.2.5 but it's quite old and people should update. Also because there're lots of improvements. In-Reply-To claims X but References claims Y. who do I believe? I would guess that In-Reply-To will win if present. It's useless to try repairing broken threading by wild guesses. And the difference between In-Reply-To and References is also trivial for the case that you reply to multiple messages at once: it can't be handled within References (since this is a kind of a linear chain) but only with In-Reply-To because multiple parents may be specified. Cheers, Rocco
mutt-1.2.5* considered HARMFUL (was: wrong In-Reply-To messes up threading)
On 2002-06-12, Rocco Rutte wrote: * Christoph Bugel [02-06-12 11:23:05 +0200] wrote: On 2002-06-11, Rocco Rutte wrote: * Christoph Bugel [02-06-11 22:21:30 +0200] wrote: [...] still, I thought that *anything* after the In-Reply-To: is supposed to be a message-id? [...] It depends on what RFC you claim to go conform with. [...] So it seems that from user1host1.org is not a valid thing to put after the In-Reply-To header, and since mutt-1.2.5?? does exactly that, I wonder if I'll have to live with broken threads until everyone will have stopped using mutt-1.2.5? If mutt 1.2.5 claims to be RFC822 compliant this behaviour is correct, according to 2822 it's wrong. I still see lots of people using 1.2.5 but it's quite old and people should update. Also because there're lots of improvements. So I guess the conclusion is: mutt-1.2.5 users break threading for everyone else on a mailing list! They should stop doing so immediately! This is not just a case of please upgrade, there are a lot of new features, this is a cse of your mail client is sending wrong and non-compliant headers. Using mutt-1.2.5 is considered RUDE! And the difference between In-Reply-To and References is also trivial for the case that you reply to multiple messages at once: it can't be handled within References hmm, I never understood the concept of replying to multiple messages. Seems like counter intuitive, and over complicated to me. Also, the threading display will become very 'interesting' when messages have multiple parents.
Re: mutt-1.2.5* considered HARMFUL (was: wrong In-Reply-To messes up threading)
* Christoph Bugel [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-06-12]: And the difference between In-Reply-To and References is also trivial for the case that you reply to multiple messages at once: it can't be handled within References hmm, I never understood the concept of replying to multiple messages. Seems like counter intuitive, and over complicated to me. Also, the threading display will become very 'interesting' when messages have multiple parents. I've used it when I want to quote the body text of several messages in a reply, e.g. if things several people have said earlier are relevant now in the discussion. IIRC mutt must treat the first of the replied-to messages as the 'parent' when it generates the In-Reply-To /or References header(s), since that was the one my message seemed to get threaded under after I'd sent it. -- Richard \\\ SuperH Core+Debug Architect /// .. At home .. P./// [EMAIL PROTECTED] /// [EMAIL PROTECTED] Curnow \\\ http://www.superh.com//// www.rc0.org.uk Speaking for myself, not on behalf of SuperH
signed email and OE
Since I'm on this list and using mutt it's obviously a safe assumption that MS products are not my first choice in software. However, many of my friends use these products, in particular Outlook Express. Recently I started GPG signing most of my emails, and have found that the recipients using OE (with default settings) are not getting the content of my emails. It seems that OE not only removes the GPG signature, but also strips out whatever text was in the body of my email. Is this just a fact of life in the world of MS, or is there a change I can make on my end in my mutt settings to get around this OE shortcoming? Obviously I can set up send-hooks with and without the signature, but this presumes I know beforehand what client the recipient is using. Is there another way? Thanks Kevin -- Kevin Coyner mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG key: 1024D/8CE11941 msg28909/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: signed email and OE
Kevin -- ...and then Kevin Coyner said... % % Since I'm on this list and using mutt it's obviously a safe assumption I know what you mean. % that MS products are not my first choice in software. However, many of % my friends use these products, in particular Outlook Express. Friends don't let friends use Outlook :-) % % Recently I started GPG signing most of my emails, and have found that % the recipients using OE (with default settings) are not getting the % content of my emails. It seems that OE not only removes the GPG % signature, but also strips out whatever text was in the body of my % email. Is the body really stripped or does it simply not open in Outhouse but instead appear as an attachment and have to be opened in a text editor or something similar? % % Is this just a fact of life in the world of MS, or is there a change I We could say that and continue to prod them to change :-) but there is a workaround. For 1.3.x and 1.4 you need Dale Woolridge's patch, found at woolridge.org(?) or at my http://mutt.justpickone.org/mutt-build-cocktail/ site, while for 1.5.x it's integrated into the stock build. Once you apply that, the traditional mode ($pgp_create_traditional) is further spindled and mutilated so that it works for LookOut!, which is so noncompliant that it can't even handle basic traditional format but needs a particular tweak to the content headers (IIRC). % can make on my end in my mutt settings to get around this OE % shortcoming? Obviously I can set up send-hooks with and without the While I wouldn't recommend turning off your sig, send-hooks are nonetheless not at all a bad idea. I send everything as PGP/MIME except in the few cases where I specifically change to traditional, and I drive that with send-hooks. % signature, but this presumes I know beforehand what client the recipient % is using. Is there another way? Beware of a wholesale change to inline PGP/gpg; it's not robust, can't handle attachments (too bad if you wanted to encrypt that tar file you were going to include), and only works with us-ascii (perhaps not even with the MS charset, something-1252-something). % % Thanks % Kevin % % -- % % Kevin Coyner % mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] % GnuPG key: 1024D/8CE11941 HTH HAND :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg28910/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: signed email and OE
% that MS products are not my first choice in software. However, many of % my friends use these products, in particular Outlook Express. Friends don't let friends use Outlook :-) LOL ! % % Recently I started GPG signing most of my emails, and have found that % the recipients using OE (with default settings) are not getting the % content of my emails. It seems that OE not only removes the GPG % signature, but also strips out whatever text was in the body of my % email. Is the body really stripped or does it simply not open in Outhouse but instead appear as an attachment and have to be opened in a text editor or something similar? It gets totally stripped. :( It is possible to see the content if the user goes into the blank message and then hits File/Properties/Details/MessageSource, but then they're using OE, right, so they are quite unlikely to do this. % % Is this just a fact of life in the world of MS, or is there a change I We could say that and continue to prod them to change :-) but there is a workaround. For 1.3.x and 1.4 you need Dale Woolridge's patch, found at woolridge.org(?) or at my http://mutt.justpickone.org/mutt-build-cocktail/ I'll give it a try. Thanks again. Kevin msg28911/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: signed email and OE
Kevin -- ...and then Kevin Coyner said... % % % that MS products are not my first choice in software. However, many of % % my friends use these products, in particular Outlook Express. % % Friends don't let friends use Outlook :-) % % LOL ! *grin* % ... % % the recipients using OE (with default settings) are not getting the % % content of my emails. It seems that OE not only removes the GPG % % Is the body really stripped or does it simply not open in Outhouse but % instead appear as an attachment and have to be opened in a text editor % or something similar? % % It gets totally stripped. :( It is possible to see the content if the % user goes into the blank message and then hits Well, if it can be seen then it's not stripped, now, is it? Since we now know that it isn't an overacheiving virus scanner or the like deleting your [attachment] text or an outright transmission failure we can either forge ahead and let 'em deal with opening the attachment (your message body almost certainly shows up as an attachment of some sort, like mebbe a .dat file, and can be opened and read with notepad or quickview) or turn on $pgp_create_traditional for those users. % File/Properties/Details/MessageSource, but then they're using OE, right, % so they are quite unlikely to do this. No argument there :-) % ... % We could say that and continue to prod them to change :-) but there is a % workaround. For 1.3.x and 1.4 you need Dale Woolridge's patch, found at % woolridge.org(?) or at my % %http://mutt.justpickone.org/mutt-build-cocktail/ % % I'll give it a try. Thanks again. Kevin HTH HAND Good luck :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg28912/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Two word alias
* Johan Svedberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-06-11 23:16]: I was just wondering if it's possible to have two word aliases? Like alias foo bar John Doe [EMAIL PROTECTED]? let's assume mutt allowed two-word-aliases. let's look at the following alias command: alias Johan Svedberg Johan Svedberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] and let's assume that you entered the following addresses at the To: prompt: To: Johan, Johan Svedberg what will be the result of the expansion? (A) To: Svedberg Johan Svedberg [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (B) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Johan Svedberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] (C) To: Svedberg Johan Svedberg [EMAIL PROTECTED], Johan Svedberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] (D) none of the above chose. Sven
Deleting a message from multiple folders
I'd like to transition to a setup where most incoming mail gets procmailed into three folders: archive-date, archive, and either INBOX or whatever other mailbox the procmail rules determine. That part i can take care of myself. But, as usual, there's the spam problem. When i go into my inbox and see eighteen pieces of spam, i'd like to tag them all, run a macro, and have those messages deleted not only from my inbox, but also from the two archive folders. Has anyone here done anything like this? Anyone got a suggestion? Thanks -- Mike Schiraldi VeriSign Applied Research msg28914/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Deleting a message from multiple folders
On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 09:52:34AM -0400, Mike Schiraldi wrote: I'd like to transition to a setup where most incoming mail gets procmailed into three folders: archive-date, archive, and either INBOX or whatever other mailbox the procmail rules determine. That part i can take care of myself. But, as usual, there's the spam problem. When i go into my inbox and see eighteen pieces of spam, i'd like to tag them all, run a macro, and have those messages deleted not only from my inbox, but also from the two archive folders. Has anyone here done anything like this? Anyone got a suggestion? spamassassin (http://spamassassin.org/) works well for me and it is set up for use w/ procmail. you add a recipe to run spamassassin. spamassassin tags it and then you can do whatever you want with the spam with another recipe. -- Peter Abplanalp Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: pgp.mit.edu
saving attachments with permissions
Mutters, In my muttrc I have the following macro: # Add a macro to prepend a default directory macro attach s save-entrybol~/public_html/eol So obviously, I want to download my attachments from a web browser. The problem is that my umask isn't lenient enough, and the attachments end up with 0600 permissions. Is there anyway to add a default permission setting of 0644 for attachment saves? Or even a macro that would issue the chmod? -Mike Arrison
Re: saving attachments with permissions
Mike -- ...and then Mike Arrison said... % % Mutters, % In my muttrc I have the following macro: % % # Add a macro to prepend a default directory % macro attach s save-entrybol~/public_html/eol Right. % % So obviously, I want to download my attachments from a web % browser. The problem is that my umask isn't lenient enough, and the Yep. % attachments end up with 0600 permissions. Is there anyway to add a That's definitely a feature; in general you don't want pieces of your mail being readable by anyone else. % default permission setting of 0644 for attachment saves? Or even a % macro that would issue the chmod? I don't use the attachment menu but instead have a little script called wmunpack (attached) which wraps munpack with a umask and a cd to the proper directory based on command-line flags (word docs go into a doc dir). The problem with macro-ing a chmod is figuring out the filename to chmod to put into your macro; it's wasteful, but as an alternative you might be able to add shell-escapechmod a+r ~/public_html/* to your macro and just add read perms to everything whenever you save to the dir. Hmmm... No, that probably won't work unless you also tack in an enter and accept whatever filename is provided, 'cuz otherwise you'll have junk thrown on the line that you don't really want. % % -Mike Arrison HTH HAND :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg28917/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Deleting a message from multiple folders
spamassassin (http://spamassassin.org/) works well for me and it is set up for use w/ procmail. you add a recipe to run spamassassin. spamassassin tags it and then you can do whatever you want with the spam with another recipe. Yeah, spamassassin is very cool, but unfortunately it's not 100% perfect. So if i let probable spam get filtered as if it weren't, it'll get dropped off in the archive folders and i'll have to delete it manually. If i drop probable spam into its own folder without archiving it, and then i find stuff in there that's not spam, i have to manually copy it to the archive folders. I think what i'll do is filter probable spam as if it were just regular mail and write a script that i can call on each piece of spam. The script will count the number of bytes in the message (call it N) and then look through the archives for all messages whose filesize is N. (I use maildir) Then, for each of those matching messages, i'll strcmp it to the original message, and if there's a perfect match, delete the file. msg28918/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Deleting a message from multiple folders
Mike -- ...and then Mike Schiraldi said... % % I'd like to transition to a setup where most incoming mail gets procmailed % into three folders: archive-date, archive, and either INBOX or whatever % other mailbox the procmail rules determine. Wow. That sounds like a big pain, IMHO. What's the purpose of having two archives, just out of curiosity, and even more what's the purpose of having an archive as well as a working copy if you're not going to store flag updates (clearing 'N', writing 'r', what's deleted, and so on) in the archive? It seems to me much more profitable to have an archive from which you don't delete anything (you didn't mention deleting from the archive(s) messages that you would delete in your INBOX, so just don't delete *anything* from the archive in the first place) and then to procmail your mail as appropriate and then archive from *those* folders on a regular basis if you want to keep the active folder size down. mutt can handle *that* with a couple of folder-hooks and the compressed folder patch easily enough. % % That part i can take care of myself. But, as usual, there's the spam % problem. When i go into my inbox and see eighteen pieces of spam, i'd like % to tag them all, run a macro, and have those messages deleted not only from % my inbox, but also from the two archive folders. % % Has anyone here done anything like this? Anyone got a suggestion? The closest I can come is to take a look at DGC's markmsg patch, which marks a message based on Message-ID: and stores it for a later search, just like marking and jumping with ' in vi. Using that to build a list of M-IDs you might fire up mutt against your other folder and delete-pattern those messages, perhaps by creating a temp muttrc that pushes the proper commands. It doesn't sound pretty, though. In general, mailboxes are separate in mutt, and there aren't any multi-box operations. Hmmm... Maybe you don't need a patch, but a simple external script; tag the offending messages, tag-pipe them to the script, and therein grab the IDs and write your muttrc, optionally even firing up mutt do clean out the folder. In either case, if you go that route, I'd recommend pushing the deletion but not synchronizing the folder just to give you a last chance for a simple check; if you pipe out 12 messages, you had better have exactly 12 flagged for deletion in the new mutt. % % Thanks % % % -- % Mike Schiraldi % VeriSign Applied Research HTH HAND :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg28919/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mutt-1.2.5* considered HARMFUL
Hi,
* Christoph Bugel [02-06-12 16:34:28 +0200] wrote:
So I guess the conclusion is:
mutt-1.2.5 users break threading for everyone else on a mailing
list! They should stop doing so immediately!
No. Because it's mutt we're talking about:
,[ ~/docs/software/mutt/manual-1.2.5.1.txt ]-
|
| 6.3.72 in_reply_to
|
| Type: string
| Default: %i; from %a on %{!%a, %b %d, %Y at %I:%M:%S%p %Z}
|
| This specifies the format of the In-Reply-To header field
| added when replying to a message. For a ful llisting of
| defined escape sequences, see the section on index_format.
|
| Note: Don't use any sequences in this format string which
| may include 8-bit characters. Using such escape sequences
| may lead to bad headers.
`-
So 'set in_reply_to=%i' would be a better default value to
also be RFC2822 compliant.
hmm, I never understood the concept of replying to
multiple messages. Seems like counter intuitive, and over
complicated to me.
It's easy. One additional field in References and multiple
in In-Reply-To.
Also, the threading display will become very 'interesting'
when messages have multiple parents.
In mutt, it only appears once (din't find anything to
configure mutt to show such a message multiple times).
* Richard Curnow [02-06-12 16:34:30 +0200] wrote:
I've used it when I want to quote the body text of several
messages in a reply, e.g. if things several people have
said earlier are relevant now in the discussion. IIRC
mutt must treat the first of the replied-to messages as
the 'parent' when it generates the In-Reply-To /or
References header(s), since that was the one my message
seemed to get threaded under after I'd sent it.
I don't have anything important to add (just an example of a
reply to multiple messages at once ;-).
Cheers, Rocco
Re: Deleting a message from multiple folders
What's the purpose of having two archives I should clarify that when i say archive-date i really mean archive-yearmonth. So it's not like i'd have thousands of archive folders. Just 12 per year. The reason i want two is because sometimes i'll know approximately when a message came in, and so i can go straight to that archive folder and quickly look it up. Right now i use one huge archive folder, and it's really slow anytime i do anything with it. But it's good to have a huge archive folder too, for those times when you don't know what month something came in, or you want to reread a thread that spanned several months and don't care if it takes mutt three minutes to thread the folder. what's the purpose of having an archive as well as a working copy if you're not going to store flag updates (clearing 'N', writing 'r', what's deleted, and so on) in the archive? Well, i don't care much about the 'r' flag. The 'N' flag is meaningless in my archive folder, since i've already read all of its messages back when they originally came in. And nothing ever gets deleted from the archive folder (except spam). The archive is not supposed to be a mirror of my inbox, it's supposed to be a never-emptied trash bin i can dig old stuff out of. An attic. In either case, if you go that route, I'd recommend pushing the deletion but not synchronizing the folder just to give you a last chance for a simple check; if you pipe out 12 messages, you had better have exactly 12 flagged for deletion in the new mutt. Yeah, this was the part i was really worried about. But if i do a strcmp of the entire file, i can be perfectly confident that i'm deleting the right message. And i won't have to strcmp all 20,000 messages in the archive, since i just have to look at messages whose filesize is exactly the same. -- Mike Schiraldi VeriSign Applied Research msg28921/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
1.4: Better at setting 'N' flag than was 1.2.5 :)
Another observation. 1.4 seems to do a MUCH better job of check mail folders and setting new (N) flags than was 1.2.5. As I've got both installed on this machine, I'd doing some side by side comparisons. Seems to be a lot of nice fine tuning in 1.4.
sorting by date question
I am using mutt to access a IMAP account, and I have sort by date. However, it sorts it by the date of sender, and not the date on which it was received. In other words, if a user has the wrong time or date on their machine, it will get reflected in my mailbox when mutt sorts it. Other IMAP clients that I use to access this same mailbox sort it by the date I actually received the mail, not the date the sender's machine says. Is there a way to have mutt sort it by the date received instead of the date sender marks it with? Thanks, Lane Brooks
Re: sorting by date question
You want to sort by (r)ecv (that is, date RECeiVed), rather than sort by (d)ate, which sorts by the Date: header. On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 11:46:07AM -0400, Lane Brooks wrote: I am using mutt to access a IMAP account, and I have sort by date. However, it sorts it by the date of sender, and not the date on which it was received. In other words, if a user has the wrong time or date on their machine, it will get reflected in my mailbox when mutt sorts it. Other IMAP clients that I use to access this same mailbox sort it by the date I actually received the mail, not the date the sender's machine says. Is there a way to have mutt sort it by the date received instead of the date sender marks it with? Thanks, Lane Brooks -- Mark REED| CNN Internet Technology 1 CNN Center Rm SW0831G | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Atlanta, GA 30348 USA | +1 404 827 4754 -- Some people have no respect for age unless it's bottled.
Re: sorting by date question
Is there a way to have mutt sort it by the date received instead of the date sender marks it with? Sure is: Sort (d)ate/(f)rm/(r)ecv/(s)ubj/t(o)/(t)hread/(u)nsort/si(z)e/s(c)ore?: ^^ -- Mike Schiraldi VeriSign Applied Research msg28925/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: sorting by date question
On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 11:46:07AM -0400, Lane Brooks wrote: I am using mutt to access a IMAP account, and I have sort by date. However, it sorts it by the date of sender, and not the date on which it was received. In other words, if a user has the wrong time or date on their machine, it will get reflected in my mailbox when mutt sorts it. Other IMAP clients that I use to access this same mailbox sort it by the date I actually received the mail, not the date the sender's machine says. Is there a way to have mutt sort it by the date received instead of the date sender marks it with? I just recently figured out how to fix this also. You can do it manually on the fly as already mentioned, or set your default sort behaviour: set date-received -- ~pete
Re: sorting by date question
On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 09:11:40AM -0700, Peter Gelbman wrote: On Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 11:46:07AM -0400, Lane Brooks wrote: I am using mutt to access a IMAP account, and I have sort by date. However, it sorts it by the date of sender, and not the date on which it was received. In other words, if a user has the wrong time or date on their machine, it will get reflected in my mailbox when mutt sorts it. Other IMAP clients that I use to access this same mailbox sort it by the date I actually received the mail, not the date the sender's machine says. Is there a way to have mutt sort it by the date received instead of the date sender marks it with? I just recently figured out how to fix this also. You can do it manually on the fly as already mentioned, or set your default sort behaviour: set date-received Oops, that was obviouysly a typo - I meant: set sort=date-received
Re: Deleting a message from multiple folders
* On 2002.06.12, in [EMAIL PROTECTED], * Mike Schiraldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That part i can take care of myself. But, as usual, there's the spam problem. When i go into my inbox and see eighteen pieces of spam, i'd like to tag them all, run a macro, and have those messages deleted not only from my inbox, but also from the two archive folders. You might try saving them to a trash folder whne you delete them, and running an asynchronous daemon that periodically captures message-ids from the trash folder, prunes them from other folders, and removes them from trash. But that's not a quick hack. -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Re: Deleting a message from multiple folders
You might try saving them to a trash folder whne you delete them, and running an asynchronous daemon that periodically captures message-ids from the trash folder, prunes them from other folders, and removes them from trash. But that's not a quick hack. That actually gives me a terrific idea: I can have procmail do this: When a message comes in: - archive it - if it's probably spam, put it in =spam - if it's not, process it normally. If i get spam in a non-spam folder, i manually move it to =spam. If i get non-spam in =spam, i manually move it out. Then, every now and then i go into =spam, double-check for false positives, tag everything, and apply a script which does the message-matching-and-deleting trick i mentioned in an earlier message. Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. -- Mike Schiraldi VeriSign Applied Research msg28929/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: solved: viewing in-line text/html with mutt and lynx
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 07:16:14PM -0600, Dave Price wrote: ok, I finally got it working right. I am using mutt and lynx Version 2.8.1rel.2 In ~/.muttrc I put: auto_view text/html text/enriched and I made a ~/.mailcap with: text/html;/usr/bin/lynx -dump -force_html %s ;copiousoutput My lynx likes -dump, not --dump and the -force_html deals with the case where the attachment filename is not .html, without it I got raw (uninterpreted) html. My version of lynx indents the text output, which is no big deal, but can be fixed pretty easily by piping through sed and stripping the leading 3 space characters: text/html;/usr/local/bin/lynx -localhost -force_html -nolist -dump %s | sed 's/^ //'; copiousoutput; Cheers, Chuck
Compiling mutt on Cygwin doesn't work
For reasons that you really don't want to know, I need to patch and compile
mutt on Cygwin. Unfortunately, I can't compile either the Cygwin sources of
1.2.5 nor mutt 1.4.0 with a stock
./configure --with-homespool=/foo/var
make
it freaks out (1.4) with
gcc -DPKGDATADIR=\/usr/local/share/mutt\ -DSYSCONFDIR=\/usr/local/etc\ -DBIN
DIR=\/usr/local/bin\ -DMUTTLOCALEDIR=\/usr/local/share/locale\ -DHAVE_C
ONFIG_H=1 -I. -I. -Iintl -I/usr/include/ncurses -I./intl -I/usr/local/include
-Wall -pedantic -g -O2 -c patchlist.c
In file included from mutt.h:51,
from patchlist.c:5:
charset.h:39: parse error before `ICONV_CONST'
:-((
I'd prefer to have a mutt 1.4, anyway. Has anybody compiled this sucessfully on
Cygwin, yet?
Gerhard
--
mail: gerhard at bigfoot dot de registered Linux user #64239
web:http://www.cs.fhm.edu/~ifw00065/OpenPGP public key id 86AB43C0
public key fingerprint: DEC1 1D02 5743 1159 CD20 A4B6 7B22 6575 86AB 43C0
reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,map(lambda x:chr(ord(x)^42),tuple('zS^BED\nX_FOY\x0b')))
Re: Compiling mutt on Cygwin doesn't work
Gerhard -- ...and then Gerhard Haering said... % % For reasons that you really don't want to know, I need to patch and compile Are you *really* sure you need to? ... % I'd prefer to have a mutt 1.4, anyway. Has anybody compiled this sucessfully on % Cygwin, yet? You should ask on the cygwin list. I know that they've been working on it, and I *believe* they are working up a 1.4 package. % % Gerhard HTH HAND :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg28932/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mutt-1.4 utf-8
Tim Freedom wrote: [snip snip] Once I invoke mutt and view my sample mbox with utf-8 characters in it (which a friend is able to see without a problem on FreeBSD) I see some correct glyphs and lots of octals, \207 \206\203 so in all, there are a few correct glyphs but the majority of them are octals. Why is this happening ? and what can I do to correct it (or debug it) ? I was able to resolve my own problem (thanks to the few people that replied and helped). It related to setting a correct locale value. Doing either of the following did the trick, % unsetenv LC_ALL % setenv LC_CTYPE en_US.UTF-8 -or- % setenv LC_ALL en_US.UTF-8 My problem was that I wasn't touching LC_ALL (which I'm guessing overrides individual settings - no mention of that in the 'man' page). Out of curiosity, why doesn't mutt enable utf-8 natively and by default ? Are there any adverse affects if that were to happen ? In the few cases where the terminal doesn't support UTF-8 (legacy systems), couldn't 'configure' probe/test for those and do the appropriate thing ? Or give the user a configure option to simple always enable it -- something akin to '--enable-utf8' ? Regards, .tf. __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
Re: mutt-1.2.5* considered HARMFUL (was: wrong In-Reply-To messes upthreading)
Hello Christoph,
On Wednesday, June 12, 2002 at 2:08:17 PM +0300, Christoph Bugel wrote:
mutt-1.2.5 users break threading for everyone else on a mailing list!
They should stop doing so immediately!
Calm down! ;-) Situation is not *so* critical:
First: many readers use more References: than In-Reply-To: to
show threads, and Mutt 1.2.5 posts this field cleanly.
Second: trash loaded IRT field is not a problem of Mutt 1.2.5
itself, but of it's configuration. One can change what's in there with
the $in_reply_to variable. It's by default %i; from %a on %{!%a, %b %d,
%Y at %I:%M:%S%p %Z}, but one can clean this by putting in muttrc:
set in_reply_to=%i
And then Mutt 1.2.5 will post correct 2822 compliant IRT, ready to
be used efficiently by any reader, whichever algorithm it uses for
threading. Including recent Mutts 1.3.x, 1.4 and more. I had this
setting like that since the first day I used Mutt, long ago.
Strangely formated IRT with creative content was (and always is)
something widely spread. Just because RFC 2822 is so recent, and 822 was
liberal. So readers were only very carefully using IRT, and were relying
more on Refs or even Subject: to build threads.
Mutt 1.4 has wonderfull code for threading: powerfull, versatile,
fast, configurable to everyone's taste, informative (I mean the ?
missing and the * broken). But a little bit fragile: Perhaps too much
confidence in IRT's content.
Bye!Alain.
--
MSOE4 users break threading for everyone else on a mailing list!
They should stop doing so immediately!
« OE4 considered HARMFUL » PCC CB on MU. © June 2002
Re: Deleting a message from multiple folders
Hello. On Wed 2002-06-12 at 10:37:21 -0400, Mike Schiraldi wrote: [...] I think what i'll do is filter probable spam as if it were just regular mail and write a script that i can call on each piece of spam. The script will count the number of bytes in the message (call it N) and then look through the archives for all messages whose filesize is N. (I use maildir) Then, for each of those matching messages, i'll strcmp it to the original message, and if there's a perfect match, delete the file. As you mentioned maildir, links popped straight to my mind. I do not know how maildir resp. the involved programs handle soft links resp. hard links, but it might be worth a try. Given that those are supported reasonably (and I do not overlook something obvious), soft links would need a helper in procmail that creates by-date-archive and incoming folders by linking messages to the real one in the main archive. Additionally mutt would have to follow and delete the real message file (maybe per macro, maybe by a little patch, which follows the symlink). From time to time a script should would have to delete all dangling soft links from the by-date-archive (and how does mutt handle broken links wrt maildirs). That's all, I think. Worst case would be IMHO if mutt wouldn't move around the link, but re-create a message file on changes. Best would probably be, if mutt already had special symlink support and followed the link to always modify the real file. With hard links, also a script called by procmail would have to assure that those are created instead of copies. On deletion mutt would have to delete the other hard links, too, which probably required a script to look for the inode id of the current mail and delete those with the same in the archives. Worst case would be, if mutt tries to be careful and always uses temporary files which it then moves over the old message on changes, because that would create a copy as soon as you change something. Best case is when any change would be done in-place and therefore the hard link would never be broken. All that said, if mutt doesn't works well with links yet, it would be probably easiest to implement the follow symlinks concept, because changing handling of temp files could have some security / reliability issues. Hope I did not confuse all others or even myself. ;-) Bye, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg28936/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mutt-1.4 utf-8
Tim -- ...and then Tim Freedom said... % % Tim Freedom wrote: % ... % I was able to resolve my own problem (thanks to the few people that % replied and helped). It related to setting a correct locale value. Oh, locale... Right. I just got bitten by that with the GNU fileutils. What a pain :-) % % Doing either of the following did the trick, % %% unsetenv LC_ALL %% setenv LC_CTYPE en_US.UTF-8 % -or- %% setenv LC_ALL en_US.UTF-8 % % My problem was that I wasn't touching LC_ALL (which I'm guessing % overrides individual settings - no mention of that in the 'man' page). Mine was not unlike this; I saw that LANG and LC_ALL were unset and so got righteously pissed off at ls's sorting, but found with a little prompting that LC_CTYPE and LC_COLLATE (as well as the others) were set to en_US.ISO8859-1, which did me in (and made me eat crow :-) % % Out of curiosity, why doesn't mutt enable utf-8 natively and by % default ? Are there any adverse affects if that were to happen ? You mean override the LC_* variables? I should think that would be obvious, so perhaps I've misunderstood your question. Glad to hear you got it all solved! HAND :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg28938/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mutt-1.4 utf-8
Tim -- ...and then Tim Freedom said... % % Tim Freedom wrote: % ... % % Once I invoke mutt and view my sample mbox with utf-8 characters in it % (which a friend is able to see without a problem on FreeBSD) I see some % correct glyphs and lots of octals, % %\207 % %\206\203 ... % Doing either of the following did the trick, % %% unsetenv LC_ALL %% setenv LC_CTYPE en_US.UTF-8 % -or- %% setenv LC_ALL en_US.UTF-8 Thanks, BTW, for posting your summary; there should be more of them. I'm sure someone else will find this information useful down the road! HAND :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg28939/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Compiling mutt on Cygwin doesn't work
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 12:29:16AM -0500, David T-G wrote: % have to wait for packagers, etc. I do that regularly on Linux and % FreeBSD, so I thought (silly me) that it would compile OOTB on Cygwin, % too. And theoretically it should. The cygwin list should have some pointers (or maybe Dr. Tom Baker, who has been playing with mutt under cygwin quite a bit). http://cygwin.com/lists.html overlaps, membership-wise, with mutt-users and would seem to be the better place to post.. I compiled very occasionally when working on a Linux machine but steer clear of the compiler under Windows because I have neither the time nor the experience to deal with the seemingly inevitable error messages. I wait for the packagers to do their thing. (Anyone got a binary for pcal, a pretty-print program for calendars?) Tom -- Dr. Thomas Baker[EMAIL PROTECTED] Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven mobile +49-171-408-5784 Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft work +49-30-8109-9027 53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-14-2619
