Re: match messages without a reply from anyone?
Thanks guys. I actually didn't ask my question correctly -- I want to match only those messages that haven't been replied to and that also started a thread. This combination does the trick nicely: !~x . ~$ Marianne -- Marianne Promberger http://promberger.info GnuPG/PGP public key ID 80AD9916 __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: match messages without a reply from anyone?
* On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 04:10PM +0100 Marianne Promberger (marianne.promber...@gmail.com) muttered: > Is there a pattern to match messages that haven't been replied to by > anyone? ~$ unreferenced messages (requires threaded view) HTH, Michael -- There are no threads in a.b.p.erotica, so there's no gain in using a threaded news reader. (Unknown source) PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC1A44DD Jabber: init...@amessage.de
Re: match messages without a reply from anyone?
* Marianne Promberger [09-16-09 11:12]: > > Is there a pattern to match messages that haven't been replied to by > anyone? > Not a pattern as such, but you could check for the existance of a "References:" header. If that header does not exist, the message *should* be initial providing the sender is using a complient client... ~h !References## Header does not contain "References" or ~x |.*## References header is empty not tested and my syntax may be incorrect ... -- Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USAHOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535@ http://counter.li.org
Re: match messages without a reply from anyone?
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 04:10:39PM +0100, Marianne Promberger wrote: > Is there a pattern to match messages that haven't been replied to by > anyone? I just tried `!~x .' and it seems to work. -- Monte
match messages without a reply from anyone?
Hi Is there a pattern to match messages that haven't been replied to by anyone? E.g. I have a mailbox open that contains messages from mailing lists. I want to see only these threads consisting of a single message, i.e. someone posted to the list but nobody has replied yet. Thanks, Marianne -- Marianne Promberger http://promberger.info GnuPG/PGP public key ID 80AD9916 __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: MIME sub-type "octet-stream" doesn't trigger smime_* for received
bill lam wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Jason wrote:
Jason wrote:
[snip]
I've followed the smime howto's, imported my certs, tried .mime.types,
.mailcap to no avail. mutt refuses to decrypt it. When i select the
email, it shows "application/octet-stream".
Here's my ${HOME}/.mailcap
###
application/octet-stream; /home/jason/bin/dump_octet.sh %s; \ needsterminal
text/html; lynx --dump --force-html %s; copiousoutput
###
And the shell script calls openssl to decrypt.
If I 'v'iew an html attachment in an unencrypted email, the above
mailcap is referenced, and the action performed. I know this because
when I remove the '--force-html' the output is raw html.
When I do the same 'v'iew on a smime.p7m file (application/octet-stream)
mutt complains with "No matching mailcap entry found. Viewing as text."
Just wild guess, what if you press 'm' (edit-mime) instead of
after pressing 'v'.
Same result, when I press 'm' after 'v', I get the following:
mailcap entry for type "application/octet-stream" not found
So, I looked at the help for that page (a little sleep does wonders for
not missing the obvious ;-) ), and saw that '^E' allows me to edit the
content type. So I change it to "application/x-pkcs7-mime". Then, I
edit my ${HOME}/.mailcap to look like the following:
#
application/octet-stream; /home/jason/bin/dump_octet.sh %s;
needsterminal
application/x-pkcs7-mime; /home/jason/bin/dump_octet.sh %s;
needsterminal
text/html; lynx --dump --force-html %s; copiousoutput
#
Same result. I edit the mime-type with '^E', the hit enter to view it,
and it says matching mailcap entry not found
There has to be something obvious that I'm missing. :-(
thx,
Jason.
