Re: regexp problem with parentheses
Scott wrote: trying to color entries in the index matching on the from field, I use the following: color index blue black '~f (Person1|Person2)' However, I get a 'parentheses not matched error' Try: color index blue black '~f (Person1|Person2)' ^ ^ Adios muchacho, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Wer Glück im Spiel hat, hat auch Geld für die Liebe.
Scoring known addresses
Hi, all! Is there a posibillity to score all known mail addresses (ie all addresses defined in aliases) in one single score statement? I only found then ~l for all messages addressed to a known mailing list: score ~l +100 Greetings, -volker -- http://die-Moellsde/ * http://Stama90de/ * http://ScriptDalede/ Qnf vfg qre Orjrvf, qnff Fvtf arhtvrevt znpura
send-hook for NNTP folders
Hi, there! I'm doing my first steps on VV's NNTP patch. Great one! :-) But I didn't found out to build a send-hook (for $attribution et al) recognizing when a posting is sent to a newsgroup (via F). I tried send-hook '~h ^Newsgroups:' 'set attribution=%n wrote:' but this did not work: Error in /home/moell/.muttrc, line 274: h: not supported in this mode Can anyone help me? -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Hier könnte Ihre Werbung stehen!
Re: Sorting in mailbox question
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 10:25:43AM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote: sort=thread/subject/date Aside from the (IMHO good) sense of the multiple sort fields just one comment to the original poster. Even if implemented, I think your problem wouldn't be solved. When sorting by thread/subject/date the subject has to be the same for sub-sorting by date. But in your case the subjects are different (some- thing like List archive November 2000, AFAIR). Gruezi, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Drugs may be the road to nowhere, but at least they're the scenic route!
Re: s/mime questions
Mike Schiraldi wrote: [...] Just a question: Is it really necessary to attach at each message the smime.p7s file (your signature or so)? It has always about the 10th size of your underlying posting, so it increases the size of your posting way much. What is it for at all? Why is this (I think) signature so large? -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Those who can't write, write manuals.
Re: validating traditional signitures
David T-G wrote: *This* question has started coming up relatively recently, and before now it hasn't been a concern. I thought I read about the whole Problems with PGP mails from Outlook more often in the last months. Whoa -- when did we jump to traditional style from macros? These macros simply let you verify *one* sig, be it traditional or not, but usually not spend the time on doing so for all messages. Macros are no longer (in 1.3.x where x=20 at least) necessary for traditional verification. I meant the whole old-style handling, not this point in special. The main thing which bothers me: I get very often old-style signed/ encrypted mails. Every time when I open such a mail I have to press Esc-P per default, which is annoing in my eyes. I would like to have this to be done automatically like in the new-style. The common answers about this problem is write a macro. Because a message-hook fails (resp. failed the last time I tried it, there was an endless loop), I have to write lots of macros (for every possible key I can enter this mail). It would be so much easier for everyone if check-traditional-pgp would become a variable (set always-check-traditional-pgp=yes), so that every mail will be checked automatically on demand (instead of handling 50% of all mail accesses via macros and doing some terrible workarounds for the other 50%). (The other problems when *writing* old-style PGP mails probably do not exist anymore. I didn't had the time to test the patches announce here in the last weeks.) All you have to do is hit esc-P and it's all there, AIUI, so either build esc-P into your macro, folder-hook an esc-P on all messages when you enter, Concerning the single Esc-P (or another bounded key): It's (clearly) intricately. Concerning folder-hook: This may a long time on large folders, so it's not really good for me. Concerning macros: There are so many ways you can enter a mail that it's hard to detect them all; and (AFAIK) not all work with macros. The only good thing I see is to make a message-hook. But (kill me if it's wrong) it seems not to work with it. *If* it's wrong: Forgive me and tell me the answer. I asked a month ago, but I found no satisfying answer. The most perfect way in my eyes is a $always-check-traditional-pgp variable. or use procmail to adjust the message at delivery time so that it looks like MIME. There's no need for another setting and for mutt to have to parse every message in case it *might* be signed in the body. Personally I don't like it to modify my mails (e.g. with procmail). In the worst case the mails become corrupted and no more readable at all. Apart from this I see no reason for modifying, the MUA can handle it. % Please don't write: There is no patch for this, write one. I don't have Of course I wonldn't write that; I'd use a semicolon instead of a comma ;-) Ok, in *this* case... :-) Unless I've misunderstood (and need correction), you've mixed two different items: traditional checking (accomplished via esc-P) and on-demand verifying (accomplished through various macros). Can you confirm or deny? Indeed I must confirm you. Sorry! The problem is clearly the *checking* not the *verifying* (this is done correctly after the manual checking). Greets, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ You think Ödipus had a problem -- Adam was Eve's mother.
Re: validating traditional signitures
Jeremy Blosser wrote: procmail or other MDAs will always be able to do it better, because they're looking at the message in exactly the right way at exactly the right time. With Mutt you're always going to have this effect not stick with the message (so you have to do it every time), you have to apply it when you enter the folder instead of as the message comes in, and the effect is not available in another MUA if you need to use one, even briefly. This is by definition an MDA issue. And the MDAs do it fine, so why not? I'm honesty, I don't have much knowledge about procmail. But in my eyes it's *not* the job of the MDA. The mail's syntax is correct, so there is no need to modify/correct them. If tomorrow a very-new-style will become standard you wouldn't transform your whole Mailbox into this one, world you? I see no error in argumenting that it's the *MUA*'s job. I see your point, that vith procmail it's way faster. But this doesn't bother me (if the checking is done on demand). P.S.: Sorry again for the wrong subject line. I proofread the body, but I forgot to do it on the subject. :-\ -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Press any key to continue or any other key to quit...
Re: recognizing traditional PGP
David T-G wrote: Hokay. As below, I just wanted to make sure of what we were discussing. I've changed the subject line to help :-) Good, thanks! You realize what you're asking, right? With PGP/MIME, mutt simply has to look at the headers to see what it must do, and that's already done, and it's pretty resistant to problems. With inline signing, mutt now has to look at the body for these magic strings [...] Yes, I'm aware of those potential problems. Now, we clearly see that it's not impossible; that's what esc-P does for us. It could cause problems, though, if it were the default behavior, and it would mean reading every mail body for parsing as well. [Is that more expensive in an mbox file? I dunno; I'm not a programmer.] It's an additional checking, so it *is* more expensive. *How* expensive it is, I don't know. (See below.) Someday :-) Yeah, this seems to be the most essential word in out thread. :-) % mail). It would be so much easier for everyone if check-traditional-pgp % would become a variable (set always-check-traditional-pgp=yes), so % that every mail will be checked automatically on demand (instead of % handling 50% of all mail accesses via macros and doing some terrible % workarounds for the other 50%). Hmmm... With this I mean, you can - press enter in the index - press down, up, pgup, pgdown in the pager - press space at the end of a message - delete (in various ways) a mail - jump to a mail - ... to view a mail. Do you really want do set a macro for each of these (and surely more!) keybindings? Not really, at least not me. So a message-hook seems to be the only senseful place to implement a check-traditional on demand. With macros it's only a nice workaround. IMHO. Understood. I think that all is well but I'm still working on my patch cocktail for .27 and won't have a use for force_traditional anyway (since I don't use 8-bit chars; I'm a boring American). BTW: Thanks a lot for your work! :-) I wasn't really aware of the fact that all of the traditional PGP stuff is highly in employment. I started using mutt together with making my first PGP experience about 4 months ago. Somehow I rather thought that no one of the developer is interested in implementing this strongly deprecated old-style -- beside of the users wish. Now I see that this was rank nonsense. I beg for pardon, for my postings sound assumedly rude. % Concerning the single Esc-P (or another bounded key): It's (clearly) % intricately. You've lost me here. Is it just me, or did you not complete your thought? It's ok for a single mail or two. But I receive a lot of them. And pressing Esc-P (or so) everytime to be able to read it (most of them are encryptet!), *is* circumstantial. % Concerning folder-hook: This may a long time on large folders, so it's % not really good for me. [...] That's interesting... It took longer by the clock to *not* check a thousand messages for traditional pgp :-) Maybe there were no or not many traditional style mail in it? I tested it in a folder with about 2100 mails. Entering the folder (with no folder-hooks) in about 2 seconds, but checking traditional with macro index F8 \ tag-pattern.entertag-prefixcheck-traditional-pgptag-prefixtag-message \ check-traditional-pgp for complete folder (sorry for the long line) takes about 9 seconds. And there are only about 650 old-style signed and/or encrypted mails in it. But normaly there is no need to check the complete folder at once. A checking on demand (i.e. only if a mail is accessed) would suffice. But maybe exactly here is the problem... in detecting the demand. I can't answer your latter point, since I haven't seen any examples of failure, but I agree that the current limitations mean lots of very similar macros. It's all we have for now, though. It's not only the fact that the macros all are similar. The other thing is to cover all possibilities. If someone implements a new way in entering a mail it doesn't work here again. Again a pro for on demand. % The most perfect way in my eyes is a $always-check-traditional-pgp % variable. Fair enough; to each his own. I don't think I'd mind having such a variable, either, since I could leave it off. You really want everyone interested in handling with the old PGP style write lots of macros and finally still forgetting some? IMHO all those people want old-style work everytime, not just for some special keybindings (and not for some other). But if you say it's hard to implement the on demand (I really don't have any clue about the mutt sources and PGP at all), macros are way better than nothing. (Up to now I just thought it was your [or the author's] intention only to support macros.) Good night (for the Europeans), happy evening (for you Americans), and happy slaying (for Buffy!) ;-) -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ The C Programming Language -- A
Re: validating traditional signitures
Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote: I'm honesty, I don't have much knowledge about procmail. But in my eyes it's *not* the job of the MDA. It makes sense to me that the mail _delivery_ agent ought to _deliver_ your mail into the mboxes that you want them in ;) Sure. D like in delivery. But why *modifying* if there is no failure in the mail syntax and if the user agent is able to handle this correct formatted mail (even when it's old-fashioned)? -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ If you cannot convince them, confuse them. -- Harry S. Truman
Re: validating traditional signitures
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then I sugest you to use: macro pager \cv enter-commandset pgp_verify_sig\nexitdisplay-messageenter-commandunset pgp_verify_sig\n Check PGP sig One question: Why isn't there a general solution for this FAQ (sic!)? In the last five months I read mutt-users this problem came up several times. Lots of mutt-users post their (more or less) complicated macros which always have their disadvantages. Ok, it seems not to me mutt's philosophy to support this traditional style. But there are some flags to handle it (some of them from patches). But none of these patches handles the old style in the same easy way than the new one. It's nice to validate old-style-PGP on keypress. And you can build several macros to do this in a more-or-less-working manner. But isn't there a solution like set handle_trditional_pgp_like_new_style=yes? Please don't write: There is no patch for this, write one. I don't have any clue about this. Unfortunately. I just see the lots of people asking for this feature (and I guess there are many more wanting it but didn't ask). And all of them have the same problems. I really don't want to start a flame war or so. I just wonder about this fact. Is it so hard to implement this feature that old style works straightforward (i.e. not with many macros covering approx. 75%)? -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ reality.sys corrupted - reboot universe? y/n
Re: Mutt sucks less than the rest
David T-G wrote: Do you mean a folder of emails that are non-MIME pgp and you want them to be seen as PGP messages? Well, what about a muttrc hook line or a macro that simply says tag-pattern.entertag-prefixcheck-traditional-pgptag-prefixtag-message to tag 'em all, hit esc-P for 'em, and then untag? Great, thanks! I should think more in macros. :-) But while trying out this ferature I saw, that I didn't convince mutt to seek in PGP encrypted mails at all (via T/~b xxx). Neither on the old or new PGP style. Even when viewing the mail. Is this true? How can I find body informations in PGP encrypted mails in a complete mailbox? Ahoi, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ There are two ways to write error-free programs. Only the third one works.
Re: Suggestion for List Etiquette
Charles Jie wrote: I Agree. For an hacker, his message should be as well tailored as his programs. But please: Don't snip *everything*! Just reading the answer or comment (to an unknown question, because I deleted the original posting in the meantime) ist more painful than ignoring superfluous quoting lines. Just my .02¤ -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ An ideal world is left as an exercise to the reader.
Re: Mutt sucks less than the rest
Lars Hecking wrote: Secondly, mutt also supports checking of traditionally signed email (i.e. without conversion). EscP check-traditional-pgp check for classic pgp Months ago there was a thread how to do this automatically. But at that time all tries didn't work; AFAIR there was a conceptual problem (endless loops or so, I don't know exactly any more). Well, to read one single mail I can hit Esc-P, but when searching in a complete folder in the message bodies this leads to a problem. Has anyone developed a working muttrc line concerning this problem ? Or is there a corresponding mutt variable in the meantime, I overlook? -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Amnesia used to be my favorite word, but then I forgot it.
save-hook on Reply-To:
Hi, mutt-users!
I got an e-mail from greetings.yahoo.com, and with this I noticed a
strange behaviour. Don't know, if this is a bug^wflea or feature, but
maybe it's interesting, though.
The interesting header lines are:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When saving (s) this mail, mutt's proposition is
Save to mailbox ('?' for list): =foobar
But I have a
save-hook 'foobar@' =friends/foo_bar
so I expected to save the mail to =friends/foo_bar, not to =foobar.
Ok, the man page to save-hook says: filename will be used as the
default filename if the message is From: an address matching regexp
..., and here it's the Reply-To: header line. But the default
behaviour of s seems to have the Reply-To:-fallback, so why not the
save-hook?
-volker
--
http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/
For large values of one, one equals two, for small values of two.
msg22314/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: my-text-mode
giorgian wrote: i put in my .muttrc the row: set editor=emacs -f my-text-mode but it doesn't work: mutt still opens my emacs in the default mode (lisp interaction); i don't want to change the default mode, just to use my-text-mode with mutt. Try set editor=emacs %s --eval '(my-text-mode)' Happy Euro, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ And on the seventh day, He exited from append mode. msg22173/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mutt file browser question
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have all my mail sorted in a number of mailboxes and when I change from one to another (i.e. go to file browser and select needed mailbox) cursor is always at the top. Is it possible to make it stay on the last open file, not jump to the top? Try patch-1.3.23.bj.current_shortcut.1 at http://home.worldonline.dk/~byrial/mutt/patches/ (It works with 1.2.14, too.) ^ -- refers to the current open mailbox if any Maybe this is what you mean. Greets, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ One way to stop a runaway horse is to bet on him. msg21683/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mutt file browser question
Volker Moell wrote: (It works with 1.2.14, too.) Sorry, typo^2. I certainly mean 1.3.24. Greets, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ fortune: cpu time/usefulness ratio too high -- core dumped. msg21685/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Announce] mutt-1.3.24i is out (BETA).
David T-G wrote: I see the new PATCHES file and its use in the ChangeLog. Yay :-) Apropos the PATCHES file: I just wanted to apply the patch-1.3.24.vvv.initials patch mentioned a few postings above (the only other patch I use in addition is patch-1.3.24.vvv.nntp). In both cases -p1 is the only patch option I use. For both patch orders (first initials, then nntp or vice versa) I get the message: The next patch would create the file PATCHES, which already exists! Assume -R? [n] I don't know much about patches, but I think this was not intended. Or was it my fault in patching wrong? -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Very few profundities can be expressed in less than 80 characters. msg21386/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: $attribution/$post_indent_string for new mail
Thorsten Haude wrote: I could send you a NEdit solution that could be changed to do what you want. Thanks, but I use emacs. In any case, ask your editor (and its command line), not Mutt. I often read this answer (and I accept it). But I thought that if mutt supports $attribution/$post_indent_string for reply, why it doesn't do it for new mail? I hoped that I simply didn't found the solution in the man-page. And the reason my $EDITOR can't do it completely is to do the %n thing (like in $attribution). Another reason to think that mutt can help me. Cheerio, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Do something unusual today. Pay a bill. msg21087/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: $attribution/$post_indent_string for new mail
David T-G wrote: I don't get it, though. Those variables reference data from the replied mail. What on earth do you expect to have in them when you're starting a new mail? In replied messages it's the realname part in From:, so now I want the realname part in To: (prompted after typing m). Is this so illogical? Seeya, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ 98% of all statistics are useless. msg21096/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mail2procmailrc
Markus Sagebiel wrote: Can't locate Curses.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /usr/lib/perl5/i386-linux /usr/lib/perl5 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/i386-linux /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl .) at /home/mark/.procmail/m2proc/mail2procmail.pl line 7. Where to find it ? See CPAN: http://search.cpan.org/ (http://search.cpan.org/search?dist=Curses) -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Support bacteria -- it's the only culture some people have!
Re: Inhibit display of MIME type during Autoview
Prahlad Vaidyanathan wrote: [-- Autoview using lynx -dump etc etc --] Now, how do I prevent this from showing up ? AFAIK you can't. But at least you can colorize this in your background color. Assume your term background is black, use color attachment black default ^ in yout ~/.muttrc. So you don't see it, although it's there. -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ rekursiv [lat.] -- siehe rekursiv msg20397/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: reply_regexp question
Robson Braga Araujo wrote: I would like to know why a regular expression like '^(\[[^]]+\] *[Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *)|([Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *\[[^]]+\] *)(([Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *)?(\[[^]]+\] *)?)*' does not work in mutt. If you are testing $reply_regexp: It's case *insensitive*. So just write re instead of [Rr][Ee]. Maybe this helps you to find the error. -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Math problems? Call 1-800-[(10x)(13i)^2]-[sin(xy)/2.362x]
Re: [Q] send-hook
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can I do that by send-hook A set [EMAIL PROTECTED] send-hook B set [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use myhdr instead, $from does not work unfortunately. send-hook . 'unmy_hdr From:' send-hook . 'my_hdr From: Doughnut [EMAIL PROTECTED]' send-hook '~L mutt' 'my_hdr From: Chicken [EMAIL PROTECTED]' -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ 2 is not equal to 3 -- not even for large values of 2.
Re: Read-only
Thorsten Haude wrote: 1. Is there any problem except writing mailboxes? No, I often do that. Do you have any special provisions in this respect? I'm not Christoph, but I often use several mutt's at the same time, too. I even modify mails in both of the mut's, and I never got problems. I think the only trouble you can get is when you append to a mailbox. -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Perl ist der geglückte Versuch, einen braindump direkt ausführbar zu machen. -- Lutz Donnerhacke
Re: Read-only
Thorsten Haude wrote: I can see me appending mail, eg. when I send one; but I usually don't modify the mails in my mboxes. What do I miss here? Argh... ok, this was confusing. What I really meant was, you can get into trouble, when you append two mails to one mailbox *at the same time*. But this is very implausible. Normal operations like delete and add mails are harmless (in my experience), even when doing this from more mutt's than one. -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ The more alcohol you drink, the more you start thinking. Where'd I park my car? Who's this woman? Why is my head in the toilet?
Re: Read-only
Thorsten Haude wrote: You do that without excessive sync-mailbox's? Of course *with*. I often forget that somewhere else on another screen another mutt is open... ;-) OK then, I'm game. Good luck! :-) -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Fachbegriffe der Informatik einfach erklärt, Teil 19: voll konfigurierbar = nicht vorinstalliert.
Re: neato PGP/push thing... almost
Hi, mutt-users! (I lost the original posting, so excuse the lost reference.) A week ago Justin asked how to check automatically traditional signed/crypted mails. He had the problem that mutt seems to go into an endless loop. I tried to figure it out and I got the same results, even with Thomas' (untested) !~g !~G addition. The last try was: message-hook !~g !~G ~h ^text/plain ~b ^-BEGIN.PGP push '\eP' Aha, that makes sense. I will try it later and report. Anyone there who solved the problem? -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ This space is for rent.
my_hdr vs. $from
Hi, there! I get some mailing lists to a second account volker-ml@... (instead of volker@...). So I want to set the correct header line From: for these lists. I tried set realname=Volker Moell set use_from=yes send-hook . 'set from=[EMAIL PROTECTED]' send-hook '~L mutt' 'set from=[EMAIL PROTECTED]' but this doesn't work: I always get the mail address Header line From: Volker Moell moell where moell is my Linux account. When setting $from not via (sent-) hook, I get this value instead of moell. But in no case I get the value from my default send-hook. When setting my_hdr instead of $from works: set realname=Volker Moell set from=[EMAIL PROTECTED] set use_from=yes send-hook . 'unmy_hdr From:' send-hook '~L mutt' 'my_hdr From: Volker Moell [EMAIL PROTECTED]' Where's my error? Is this a bug or a feature? Is there a way to get rid of the my_hdr From: to use the $from variable? Thanks in andvance for any hints, -volker BTW: I'm using the latest mutt-1.3.23. -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error.
Re: Temporarily deactivate auto_view
Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote: You don't _have_ to split up your .muttrc. It's just a feature, and it has it's uses. Well, really? This would be great for me. But I don't know how to write only one muttrc when switching my digfferent identity settings on pres- sing a key (F11/F12). Is there really a mechanism to do this *without* sourcing separate files? I suppose so. You say potato, I say potahto :) And you like tomato, and I like tomahto. ;-) Mutt is perfect the way it is, IMNSHO :) I don't think it's perfect. It's just good. :-) Well, it's supposed to suck less than the other mail clients, right? :) Way, indeed! This is the reason for switching to mutt a few months ago. -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Diese Signatur wurde per Zufall ausgewählt, ist aber nicht repräsentativ PGP signature
Re: Temporarily deactivate auto_view
René Clerc wrote: macro index F11 :set foo=blaenter\ :set bar=blaenter\ :set ... ... :set bart_simpson=crazyenter\ [...] So you'd be better of sourcing some files ;) Indeed. And luckily! :-) In the meantime I arrived at the decision that my problem isn't the source mechanism, but the workarounds for other mutt-specifics (i.g. to change a single one default send-hook I have to unset every of the other ones and define the rest [IMHO unnecessarily] again). But meanwhile that's ok so. In small steps I begin to think better in mutt. Thanks to all for giving me the clue, :-) -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Multiple exclamationmarks he said, shaking his head, A sure sign for a deseased mind. -- Terry Pratchett in Eric PGP signature
Re: Temporarily deactivate auto_view
Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote: Also, what is the _effective_ difference between sourcing a file, and writing some kind of mutt-script to toggle a bunch of options? I don't actually see one :) I think: way better clearness. See for example the following situation: Using different identities via macro index F11:source ~/.mutt/private.rc\n macro index F12:source ~/.mutt/business.rc\n (I don't like folder-hooks for that). Because I need another default send-hook in each of my identities, I have to put all my send-hooks into both of these .rc files (together with the unhook send-hook at the beginning of these .rc files). Some of these hooks are the same, and I didn't want to edit two files parallel, so I make another one general-hooks.rc which is sourced in the identity .rc's. And so on an so on... Sometimes I'm just wondering, if I have set or unset some feature. To have a single muttrc (IMHO) would be more comfortable to have an overview to all. When debugging your mutt configuration you have to go through a lot of files in the worst case - I don't really like this. When asking friends for help on some mutt questions, I would rather send them my muttrc instead of a huge tarball. In bash friends. you have the possibility to source lot's of files, too. But do you split off your ~/.bashrc into a dozen or more pieces? I don't. When supporting scripting options (variables, if), (at least) I would write my muttrc a little bit better readable, and better debuggable. Mutt is perfect the way it is, IMNSHO :) I don't think it's perfect. It's just good. :-) And I really don't want to start another fame war (I think there were a lot about it) - this should only be my very-IMHO-answer of your question. Greetings, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Ask not for whom the telephone bell tolls ... if thou art in the bathtub, it tolls for thee. PGP signature
next mail on reverse sorting
Hi, all! E.g., when deleting a mail mutt jumps to the next mail. This seems to be the next unread mail with a *higher* index number. Is it possible to reverse this behaviour? I use set sort=reverse-date, and it's very inefficient to read mails in the right order when deleting some of them on the fly, because mutt always jumps to an old mail (not to the next newer). -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ You know you are addicted to the internet when... your service provider calls *you* for tech support.
Output of UNIX commands
Hi, there! The output of UNIX commands traditionally will be substituted before the line is parsed. For the example my_hdr X-Operating-System: `uname -a` this is ok. But is there a solution to get the output of commands which change often, for example my_hdr X-Date: `date` I tried to put it into a send_hook for ., this doesn't work, too. Thanks in advance for hints, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/
Re: Output of UNIX commands
I wrote: But is there a solution to get the output of commands which change often, for example my_hdr X-Date: `date` Anser to myself: Quote the backticks. \`...\` (Thanks to Peter due to his send-hook . my_hdr X-Uptime: \`uptime\`!) -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ God is real, unless declared integer.
Re: shell escape (!) oddity
Drew Raines wrote: I press ! to execute a shell command, and if I press enter at the prompt instead of a command, it kicks me out of mutt without saving. Not really: Type exit and you get back to mutt. It's just a sub shell. If this is the desirable behavior, will someone explain why? Don't know... -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Don't go surfing in South Dakota for a while.
Re: Handling attachments
Mack Stevenson wrote: I am using mutt 1.2.5, but I can't read/view attachments if I don't first save them into a separate file. When the viewer expects the name of a file in the command-line, piping doesn't work; so how do other mutt users solve this problem? Just by pressing v in the index/pager? This is the normal way. Or didn't I understand your question correct? -volker -- http://die-moells.de/ * http://stama90.de/ * http://scriptdale.de/ Twenty Percent of Zero is Better than Nothing. -- Walt Kelly
Re: Umlaut blues
Kai Blin wrote: I compiled mutt-1.3.21 with imap and ssl support, not touching the nls setting. My LANG is set C and my LC_CTYPE is de_DE. Still, my umlauts show a question mark. What did I miss? Try to compile with one or both of the ./configure switches --enable-locales-fix and --without-wc-funcs. I needed the two of them. -volker -- http://die-moells.de/ * http://stama90.de/ * http://scriptdale.de/ Excellent day to have a rotten day.
To Me, Myself and I
Hi, there! When using the set from='[EMAIL PROTECTED]' every mail from this address to another person is displayed in the index with To But I use several e-mail addresses (and I have some more, older ones). Is it possible to specify *multiple* e-mail addresses (or better a RegExp) which are concerned to belong to me, to see the To ... on each of them, not only for the current $from entry? -volker -- http://die-moells.de/ * http://stama90.de/ * http://scriptdale.de/ You know you've been hacking too long when... ...you want to 'grep keys /dev/pockets'.
Re: GPG, mutt and Outlook Express
Andre Bonhote wrote: I just installed GPG 1.0.6 on my linux box and configured mutt to work with it. Fine so far. Next, I set up a test win2k box with Outlook Express, PGP 6.5.8 and later with 7.0.3. Now, after exchanging keys (which are different, for testing purpose), I first tried to send an encrypted message to my mutt, that worked fine. Then I replied to OE and got two different files: a .dat file and a .asc file. You all know what follows: I was not able to open/decrypt the mail message. Two Words: outlook! :-( Use Inline Signatures: set pgp_create_traditional=yes But note: This option controls whether Mutt generates old-style PGP encrypted or signed messages under certain circumstances. Note that PGP/MIME will be used automatically for messages which have a character set different from us-ascii, or which consist of more than a single MIME part. Also note that using the old-style PGP message format is strongly deprecated. CU, -volker -- http://die-moells.de/ * http://stama90.de/ * http://scriptdale.de/ This signature is inoperative. Please try another.
Echoing text in the status bar?
Hi, there! Is there a possibility to echo text in the status bar (I mean the very last line in mutt, where messages like You are on the first page. appear)? I want to display some informations after applying complex macros. -volker -- http://die-moells.de/ * http://stama90.de/ * http://scriptdale.de/ I often quote myself; it adds spice to my conversation. -- G. B. Shaw
query_command handling of '%s' vs. %s
Hi! When setting set query_command=~/bin/mutt-email '%s' and searching for two words, e.g. foo bar, it my $query_command got two args foo and bar, not the single one foo bar. When I see command '%s' I think that the single quotes will use only one argument (including the space). On command %s without the single quotes i expect multiple args. Is this a bug or a feature? -volker -- http://die-moells.de/ * http://stama90.de/ * http://scriptdale.de/ Caution: breathing may be hazardous to your health.
query_command handling of '%s' vs. %s
Hi, there! When setting set query_command=~/bin/mutt-email '%s' and searching for two words, e.g. foo bar, it my $query_command got two args foo and bar, not the single one foo bar. When I see command '%s' I think that the single quotes will use only one argument (including the space). On command %s without the single quotes i expect multiple args. Is this a bug or a feature? -volker -- http://die-moells.de/ * http://stama90.de/ * http://scriptdale.de/ What's another word for Thesaurus? -- Steven Wright
No record of mails (on fcc-hook) when mailbox is not valid
Hi, there! When specifying the fcc-hook: fcc-hook 'foo' +x/y/z without having a folder x/y/, mutt displays an error message which I can't read, and then at once the Mail sent.. I even can't read the 'message when increasing the $sleep_time. But not the not-readable error message is the problem, but the not-saving of the mail. I got at least no question dialog, and a grep found nothing (both in ~/Mail and /tmp). Is this a bug or do I have something misconfigured? -volker -- http://die-moells.de/ * http://stama90.de/ * http://scriptdale.de/ Q: What's a light-year? A: One-third less calories than a regular year.
