Re: Remove prefix from subject header in index view
On 15.12.12 17:03, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> Probably it is not yet in mutt, but might be included later. Many
> features from mutt started as separate patches (or are still flying
> around as patches) until they have been included into main mutt.
Just tweaking the index view is only half a fix, IME. So some time ago I
removed the nuisance from the troublesome list, using procmail:
:0
* ^TO_luv-main@.*luv.asn.au
{
# We need the subject line _content_, minus [list-name]:
SUBJECT=`formail -czX "Subject:" | sed -re "s/Subject:// ; s/
\[luv-[a-z]*\]//g"`
# Header filter leaves body alone:
:0fhw
| formail -i "Subject: $SUBJECT"
# Delivery, with lockfile:
:0:
luv-main
That has the advantage that the [list-gumpf] is gone not only from the
index, but also from the edit-headers in vim, when replying.
It has worked for me for many months, though the list has now removed
the Subject pollution, due to the many complaints. (At least that's what
I recall. I wouldn't know.)
If more than one list were a nuisance, it could be repackaged as a
non-delivering generic filtering rule.
Erik
--
Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank.
Give a man a bank and he can rob the world.
- Seen on http://jyllands-posten.dk/
Re: Remove prefix from subject header in index view
Hi Marco! On Fr, 14 Dez 2012, Marco wrote: > On 2012–12–14 Christian Brabandt wrote: > > > See the thread, that was discussed here recently "mailing list subject > > line tags" > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.mutt.user/39591/focus=39629 > > Thanks for the info. As far as I understand mutt does not have such > a feature, but someone wrote a patch for it. > > What's the reason that the “subjectrx” patch is not included in > mutt? Apparently I'm not the only one interested in a subject regex. Probably it is not yet in mutt, but might be included later. Many features from mutt started as separate patches (or are still flying around as patches) until they have been included into main mutt. regards, Christian -- Substantial penalty for early withdrawal.
Jump to next mailbox with unread mail
Hi, I mapped “>” to “next-unread-mailbox”, but it does not work as expected. Assume that I have two mailboxes, “alpha” and “beta”. If I am in mailbox “alpha” and a new mail arrives in “beta”, I can press “>” and jump to mailbox “beta”. That's what I expect. However, when ten new mails arrive in mailbox “beta”, I press “>” and jump to mailbox “beta”. I then read two of them and go back to “alpha”. Then there are still eight unread mails in “beta”, but pressing “>” shows “No mailboxes have new mail” and it does not open mailbox “beta”. “.” shows: “New mail in =.beta”, however “>” shows: “No mailboxes have new mail” Two things I don't understand: ∙ The error message “No mailboxes have new mail” is wrong. The function is called “next-unread-mailbox”, it should jump to a mailbox containing *unread*, not *new* mail. That means, the error message should be “No mailboxes have unread mail”. ∙ There is new *and* unread mail in the mailbox (it shows the symbol “N” in the index view) that means it should jump to the mailbox in any case. I assume that I misunderstand how this function works. Maybe someone can enlighten me? Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: HTML markup in email [was: Please set your line wrap to a sane value]
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 07:43:12PM -0600, Derek Martin wrote: > Same arguemnt as above. Also this is mostly not interesting > anymore. When you compare this to the amount of bandwidth consumed > by things like streaming video, it's a drop in the bucket. Streaming video is specifically requested. I rec a lot of HTML email I don't request. There is a big diference. -- "If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." --- Malcolm X
