Re: How do I browse folders using IMAP?
Hello.
On Tue 2002-10-01 at 14:23:03 -0700, you wrote
--- Michael Tatge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered:
I usually work with mail on the local machine, but
sometimes have to log onto an IMAP server. I have no
problem logging on with c{user@server}inbox.folder
but I would like to browse the IMAP folders, but
every c? or cTab only lists the local folders
(I usually want the local folders, but not when
connected to the IMAP server).
set folder=imap://user@server
I tried that, both:
set folder=imaps://user@server and
set folder=imaps://user@server/inbox
and I just get the error message (on c?, and both
before and after I log onto the IMAP server):
imaps://user@server: No such file or directory (errno = 2)
I just tried this with
set folder=imaps://user@server/
on Mutt 1.4i (2002-05-29), with and without trailing slash,
and it works as expected, i.e. typing c? asks for my
password and then presents the list of IMAP folders and
c=ITAB completes with =INBOX.
Looks like your version of mutt does not understand the
imaps:// syntax?
Regards,
Benjamin.
msg31442/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: fast conversion of html mail to text
Hello. On Tue 2002-09-24 at 15:36:49 +0200, Eric Smith wrote: I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip the tags faster? Be sure to use the -nopause flag. Else, if lynx display a status message for some reason, it will wait for some second(s). And yes, it also does this with -dump and -source, where one does not get to see the status message at all. At least, last time I tried. Bye, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg31165/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: less-like behavior for search/search-next
Hi. On Tue 2002-09-17 at 01:32:22 -0700, Jeremy Lin wrote: [...] So how do people right now search for multiple occurences of a pattern anyway? By pressing 'n', like in 'less'. :-) Never noticed that re-searching for the same pattern does not find the next match, like in less, because I never needed it. (well, additionally, on german keyboards, '/' is 'SHIFT-7'). By having separate bindings for search, search-next, and search-opposite? Seems so. Default binding are '/', 'n' and 'ESC-/'. HTH, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg30983/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Feature request: cross-mbox threading
Hi. Just minor addition, else, I think this has been discussed quite thourougly now. On Sat 2002-07-06 at 11:07:53 +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote: * Benjamin Pflugmann [02-07-05 23:56:08 +0200] wrote: On Fri 2002-07-05 at 01:36:52 +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote: I misunderstood him (completely) but one may specify a limit pattern to show only the mails of one correspondence. How? Hmm, is that a trick question? You limit to mails from you to A and to mails from A to you. Or did I miss something, again? No, not a trick question. Just a different path of thought. I (mis-)understood correspondence more like thread and not as communication partner. Greetings, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg29430/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Feature request: cross-mbox threading
Hi. On Fri 2002-07-05 at 01:36:52 +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote: * Benjamin Pflugmann [02-07-05 00:44:50 +0200] wrote: [...] I misunderstood him (completely) but one may specify a limit pattern to show only the mails of one correspondence. How? I do not think so. The work to do would not be significantly more than with one folder and threading enabled. Sure, it takes some time, but that it already does with one folder, which you suggested as work-around. Well, the code added would have to read mails from a few additional folders instead of just one. But my point was that your suggestion would have all the mails in one folder instead. I cannot see loading 3 x 1000 messages being significantly slower/faster than 1 x 3000. Or are we talking at cross-issues? I have a problem with the checks involved allthough it may be quite less. I also run mutt on a really old machine where every portion of new code makes working unnecessarily hard. Well, the behaviour would be optional. One if-case doesn't cost much in this case. You can also make mutt save the mail to the folder it was sent from. I already have in- and outgoing mails in the same folder. Don't know if that matters to the original poster. You can limit to every mail not from you. If you don't need the thread anymore, move it to the archive. Well, that is exactly the point. If I moved it to the archive and get a new message and have to look it up... [...] Currently I have a macro defined which files the message in the archive folder as mark that it has been done. I do it completely different without creating the need of such a flag on my own. I also keep a state 'done' which I nicely work around without another flag. My filter creates an archive I usually read only. A mail is considered to be 'done' if I delete it from the folder. I see my folders as a kind of temporary place. Older folders are compressed and can be read using the rr.compressed patch. Outgoing mail is saved to the same archive folder, so I have all I need in one place. If I did not misunderstand you, that is exactly what I have, except that I move the mails only after they are done. But this does not matter in this case. To repeat: New mails are filed in a seperate folder, there is also an archive folder. Outgoing mails go directly to the archive. Mails are deleted from the incoming folder, when done (and for me, also moved to the archive). And additionally, the archive is also compressed. ;-) The problem arises (or more precisly: the requested feature could be of use), when a new mail arrives, which belongs to an done thread and I have to look it up in the archive. As I said, that mainly happens only with support mails to me, so maybe you simply do not encounter this, because you do no support? This includes two things: Getting mails after a long period of time (more than a month), which continues an old thread, and people unable to quote significant context in such mails. On the other hand, I delete/file done mails at once, because I need to be able to see quickly, if there are undone mails pending. And unread would not work, because priorities often demand that I read all e-mails, but do not process the unimportant ones for some days. [...] I don't want to say that such a feature would be useless at all, I just say it's useless to me since I've organized my communication to not require such features. Or because you do not get the kind of mails I get? ;-) [...] If you find this feature that usefull, well, than start coding it... ;-) As I said initially in my first mail, I am not sure whether I agree with the original poster about the solution. I just wanted to show that the requested feature would indeed solve a problem which has no direct solution yet. Greetings, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg29405/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Threading on an arbitrary header?
Hi. On Thu 2002-06-20 at 16:56:24 +1000, Scott Howard wrote: I'm fairly certain this isn't possible, but... Our helpdesk system sends out emails every time a task/case/request is created/updated/closed/etc. These take the form of something like : 17 + Jun 17 Helpdesk ( 0) New Task - Task#: 12345678 18 + Jun 17 Helpdesk ( 0) Task Updated - Task#: 12345678 19 + Jun 17 Helpdesk ( 0) Task Closed - Task#: 12345678 I'd like to be able to get mutt to thread these messages together as a single thread, but I can't see an easy way to do it. It has some side-effects which may be unwanted, but the following regexp should make mutt view those subject as belonging to one thread, by telling it to consider the beginning up to Task#: reply mark (i.e. like Re: ): set reply_regexp=.* - Task#: unset strict_threads # that's the default set sort_re # that's the default Of course, you probably want to set it for the folder in question, let's say support: folder-hook . 'set reply_regexp=^(re|aw|sv):[ \t]*; ' folder-hook =support 'set reply_regexp=^.* - Task#: ' (the latter is the default, change it to whatever you want). The mail all runs through procmail, so I can get procmail to put in a header such as : X-Task-Num: 12345678 but short of hacking the code I can't see a way to use that as the key for threading. Probably it would be more useful, if the subject would start with the task number, as reply_regexp wouldn't have to include the real subject part. Additionally a short test showed that it (changing reply_regexp) will only work, if no valid References and In-Reply-To headers are given, else it will use them - being more precise information. But from what you wrote, these shouldn't be given (else you wouldn't have that threading problem, would you?). Bye, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg29109/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
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: to save tagged messages
Hi. On Mon 2002-06-03 at 17:17:10 +0300, Jussi Ekholm wrote: Benjamin Pflugmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 01:43:23PM +0300, Jussi Ekholm wrote What I noticed, was, that it doesn't really tag those collapsed threads, only the first message. Is there any work-around for this? Would be nice to be able to mark a big bunch of (non-interesting) mails read quickly. Just use Esct tag-thread tag the current thread It doesn't do the job either. It does, as the main concern you expressed in your mail was that the messages inside the collopsed thread were not tagged. I did not care to investigate behind the main issue. You seem to be right that tag-prefix (;) will not work on messages in the collapsed thread, as tag-prefix seems to always only work on the displayed messages (which comes in quite handy when you are working on a limited view). I did tag a certain thread with tag-thread, and then pressed ;N. Still, only the first article of that thread got marked read... On this, my answer would have been: Just use ^R read-threadmark the current thread as read For the stuff which does not have its own thread command, I fear you have to rely on some macros as David said. Bye, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg28544/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Two questions
Hi. On Tue 2002-06-04 at 00:50:01 +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote: [...] That is sort of ``batch'', I guess. I miss one-by-one instead of all-at-once. It would be nice if I could tag messages I want to reply to so that I can answer each individual mail instead of a mass reply... Maybe I completely miss your point, as I am not sure why you would want to do that. I guess you want to tag messages as you first read the whole folder, and then start replying to the messages you picked before. You could tag the messages in question, then limit your view to tagged messages and hit reply for each of them. Considering the amount of typing involved for answering a message, I doubt that extra r (or g or L) does hurt. Does that help or do you want to archieve something else? Bye, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg28550/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Changing from address
Hi. On Mon 2002-06-03 at 23:07:26 -0400, Mike Arrison wrote: Mutters, I, like most of you, have more than one address I send from. I use folder hooks to set from, my_hdr From, and my_hdr Reply-To. This works perfectly except when I forget to change to the right folder before sending a message. So when I find myself at the compose menu with a finished message and the wrong addresses (a profile if you will) what am I to do? I'm think about something like a macro to change everything, but changing the same vars as my folder hooks doesn't seem to work. I'm sure I'm not the only one with this problem. Any help here? How about using a send-hook that checks for the to/from/cc. Mine for this list looks like (1-1 copy from my muttrc): send-hook '~C ^mutt-(users|dev)@mutt\.org$ | ~f ^benjamin-mutt@pflugmann\.de$' ' \ my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; \ set attribution=On %d, %F wrote: ; \ set signature=~/.signature_mutt ; \ set pgp_sign_as=0xDA119C70 ' # in contrast to '~C listadress ( ~P | ~p )' this rule will also # catch private mail which relates to the list. send-hook assures the # correct mail address is set. fcc-save-hook '~f ^benjamin-mutt@pflugmann\.de$ | \ ~C ^benjamin-mutt@pflugmann\.de$' =archive/rmutt.gz fcc-save-hook '~C ^mutt-dev@mutt\.org$' =archive/mutt_dev.gz fcc-save-hook '~C ^mutt-users@mutt\.org$' =archive/mutt_user.gz HTH, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg28560/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: to save tagged messages
Hi. On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 01:43:23PM +0300, Jussi Ekholm wrote [...] I was just wondering -- I tried tagging some collapsed threads, and then pressing ;N. I was just guessing, but I guessed it right: it marks the tagged articles (un)read... What I noticed, was, that it doesn't really tag those collapsed threads, only the first message. Is there any work-around for this? Would be nice to be able to mark a big bunch of (non-interesting) mails read quickly. Just use Esct tag-thread tag the current thread instead of t tag-entry tag the current entry to tag the messages. Bye, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg28443/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: view other msgs while composing
Hello. On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 10:31:13AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 06:19:47 +0200, Johannes Berth wrote: [...] Apart from that, you might want to Postpone the Mail. This is what I often do. Since I discovered attach-mail (usually 'A'), I do not postpone/CTRL-Z anymore, if screen is not available, but just misuse this feature to browse the mails and then return to the compose menu and continue editing the mail in question. Regards, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg27861/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
