Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Thorsten Haude
Hi, I see on the mutt homepage that gnupg is recommended over pgp. Are there reasons for this beyond the whole 'use gnu whenever possible because of their licensing'? Or are there real, functional reasons behind choosing gnupg over pgp? The whole 'use gnu whenever possible because of their

Re: special reply_regexp

2000-12-14 Thread Daniel Kollar
Hi, thank you the regexp, but mutt still does not show threads. I'm puzzled. An example of the subjects, which should be recognized as a thread is following: Subject: [ifc-ml:2583] Re: Illegal circuit data for smincut Subject: [ifc-ml:2584] Re: Illegal circuit data for smincut The sorting

Re: Error messages

2000-12-14 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 06:12:43PM -0800, David Alban wrote: Greetings! At 2000/12/13/18:58 -0600 David Champion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You mean just to test the muttrc file and report parse errors? How about: mutt -F test.muttrc -f /dev/null -e "push x" /dev/null That's

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Charles Curley
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 01:56:21PM -0800, Myrddin muttered: Just like the subject says. I see on the mutt homepage that gnupg is recommended over pgp. Are there reasons for this beyond the whole 'use gnu whenever possible because of their licensing'? Or are there real, functional reasons

Q: How display aliases?

2000-12-14 Thread Jonathan Gift
Hi, I remember when first on mutt there was a command to display all my aliases and then highlight one and send mail from there. I can't seem to find it and wonder if I've turned it off in my .muttrc file... Thanks Jonathan -- "Hey, I think I finally got the hang of i-"

Re: Q: How display aliases?

2000-12-14 Thread Thorsten Haude
Hi, Jonathan Gift wrote: I remember when first on mutt there was a command to display all my aliases and then highlight one and send mail from there. I press 'm', then tab. Thorsten

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Charles Curley
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 08:22:33AM -0500, Thomas E. Dickey muttered: On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Charles Curley wrote: On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 01:56:21PM -0800, Myrddin muttered: One reason is security. GPG is free software, PGP is captive. This means you can get the GPG source, read it and

Question regarding clearsigning emails automatically

2000-12-14 Thread walton
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I would first like to thank Graham, Brian, and Andrew for their responses to my question regarding clearsigning my emails. As you can see, this message is clearsigned. Now, I what I would like to do is configure Mut so that it

Re: question regarding gnupg in my regular signature

2000-12-14 Thread Bryan K. Walton
Hi, I would first like to thank Graham, Brian, and Andrew for their responses to my question regarding clearsigning my emails. As you can see, this message is clearsigned. Now, I what I would like to do is configure Mut so that it will clearsign automatically. I know there is

Re: Error messages

2000-12-14 Thread David Alban
Peter, At 2000/12/14/12:19 +0200 Peter Pentchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a side note - is there a reason you could not use the standard '[' test operator? Along with some quoting of possibly-null arguments, of course.. something like: [ -n "$1" ] muttrc="$1" [ ! -e "$muttrc" ]

Re: Error messages

2000-12-14 Thread Josh Huber
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 07:37:47AM -0800, David Alban wrote: Of course, this would be O.K. I prefer the [[ ]] operator (found in ksh and bash 2.x) because it is smarter and more resistant to syntax errors that occur with [ ] if a variable is undefined. But certainly one can use [ ] and

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread rex
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 05:48:30AM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: One reason is security. GPG is free software, PGP is captive. This means you can get the GPG source, read it and compile it for yourself. What? PGP source code has always been available. The source for PGP 6.5.8 can be

Re: Display name in index

2000-12-14 Thread Josh Huber
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 09:58:26AM -0600, Gottipati Aravind wrote: Hi In the Index , in the sent-mail folder (mailbox)all the messages show my name. I want to set it up so that the messages show the name of the person I sent the mail to.. and not my name! Is there a way to ask mutt

Re: Question regarding clearsigning emails automatically

2000-12-14 Thread Lars Hecking
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, I would first like to thank Graham, Brian, and Andrew for their responses to my question regarding clearsigning my emails. As you can see, this message is clearsigned. Please trim your lines to 72-76 chars per line. Thank you. IMHO signing list email

Re: Error messages

2000-12-14 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:12:48AM -0500, Josh Huber wrote: On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 07:37:47AM -0800, David Alban wrote: Of course, this would be O.K. I prefer the [[ ]] operator (found in ksh and bash 2.x) because it is smarter and more resistant to syntax errors that occur with [ ] if

Re: Question regarding clearsigning emails automatically

2000-12-14 Thread David Champion
On 2000.12.14, in [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Lars Hecking" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMHO signing list email is a useless and wasteful exercise, especially if the sender hasn't submitted his/her keys to the public keyservers. In this situation, those who have configured their encrytion

Re: Error messages

2000-12-14 Thread Josh Huber
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 06:27:54PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote: I dare you to name a relatively-modern version of csh, tcsh, bash, ksh or zsh, which does not have test/[ as a builtin ;) Ok, you got me there. I'm sure they all have this as a builtin, but was that at least the historical reason

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Charles Curley
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 08:17:29AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] muttered: On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 05:48:30AM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: One reason is security. GPG is free software, PGP is captive. This means you can get the GPG source, read it and compile it for yourself. What? PGP

Re: Question regarding clearsigning emails automatically

2000-12-14 Thread Werner Koch
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, David Champion wrote: Having the signatures come up, and my mailer and OpenPGP client freeze while I wait to download a signature that might and might not be on the And on a slow box (mine) it even freezes during signature verification. It would be much better if Mutt has

Re: Question regarding clearsigning emails automatically

2000-12-14 Thread Werner Koch
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Lars Hecking wrote: IMHO signing list email is a useless and wasteful exercise, especially if the sender hasn't submitted his/her keys to the public keyservers. Well, that depends on the content of the mail. But you are right, for the bulk of ML traffic, there is no

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Lars Hecking
This is getting kind of off-topic for this list ... Is the German government just as much a police state as the US? I'm not sure, but I suspect that -- in spite of their Orwellian ban on teaching the history of Germany in the 1930s and 1940s and other evidence -- they are not. I am

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Thorsten Haude
Hi, this is certainly ot, but you made a really wrong assumption (I hope) about Germany and I don't want to let that stand. I don't know the terms of the German grant to the FSF for funding GPG; perhaps the test is on their web site (but, alas, I am not literate in German). The site's native

Re: Question regarding clearsigning emails automatically

2000-12-14 Thread Charles Curley
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 06:24:10PM +0100, Werner Koch muttered: On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, David Champion wrote: Having the signatures come up, and my mailer and OpenPGP client freeze while I wait to download a signature that might and might not be on the And on a slow box (mine) it even

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 06:59:09PM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: You are either totally misinformed or denying that anything bad happened in these years. Which one? During my time in various schools, I had to take three classes about nazism in Germany. This is typical. Yup. We're the good

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Charles Curley
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 06:59:09PM +0100, Thorsten Haude muttered: Hi, this is certainly ot, but you made a really wrong assumption (I hope) about Germany and I don't want to let that stand. Nor I; thank you for the correction. I don't know the terms of the German grant to the FSF for

Re: Question regarding clearsigning emails automatically

2000-12-14 Thread Bruno Postle
On Thu 14-Dec-2000 at 11:03:13AM -0600, David Champion wrote: This has come up before in my conversation with others. I think that signing all mail as a policy is a waste of resources and a potential source of annoyance, whether it's list mail or not. I think that sensitive material (code

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Thorsten Haude
Hi, On 00-12-14, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: Yup. We're the good guys Well, I wouldn't go this far. Thorsten

compressed mailbox mutt

2000-12-14 Thread Rajesh Fowkar
Hi Listers, I have downloaded the new mutt 1.2.5i rpm with compressed folder option enabled. I have created a gzip file oldlih.gz ( tar -zcvf oldlih nov2000 ). Here nov2000 is the archieve of the mailing list mailbox of nov. The new /etc/Muttrc has got the following additional hooks for

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 07:44:57PM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: Yup. We're the good guys Well, I wouldn't go this far. We're considerably better than the most :) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] System Engineerinnominate AG Diplom-Informatiker

Re: compressed mailbox mutt

2000-12-14 Thread Lars Hecking
Please trim your long lines next time. But when I try to access this oldlih.gz I am getting the message for a split second decompressing oldlih.gz and than the mutt bar displays the message no mailbox. What's wrong ? It's called *compressed* folders patch - not "tar'ed and compressed"

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Lars Hecking
Ralf Hildebrandt writes: On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 07:44:57PM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: Yup. We're the good guys Well, I wouldn't go this far. We're considerably better than the most :) Sure. "Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen." Heard that before. Didn't like it.

Re: special reply_regexp

2000-12-14 Thread Gary Johnson
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 10:20:17AM +0100, Daniel Kollar wrote: Hi, thank you the regexp, but mutt still does not show threads. I'm puzzled. An example of the subjects, which should be recognized as a thread is following: Subject: [ifc-ml:2583] Re: Illegal circuit data for smincut

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread David T-G
Myrddin -- ...and then Myrddin said... % Just like the subject says. My guess, though I'm not one of the developers, is that gnupg is considered to be more flexible and capable and thus a better tool to use with mutt. Yeah, the licensing is great (which is great for anyone writing hooks to it

Re: compressed mailbox mutt

2000-12-14 Thread Michael Tatge
Rajesh Fowkar muttered: I have downloaded the new mutt 1.2.5i rpm with compressed folder option enabled. I have created a gzip file oldlih.gz ( tar -zcvf oldlih nov2000 ) ^^^ ^^ The result is a tared and gziped file named 'oldlih'. Here

Re: compressed mailbox mutt

2000-12-14 Thread David T-G
Rajesh -- Did you know that your clock is off? ...and then Rajesh Fowkar said... % Hi Listers, % % I have downloaded the new mutt 1.2.5i rpm with compressed folder option enabled. Yay :-) % % I have created a gzip file oldlih.gz ( tar -zcvf oldlih nov2000 ). Here nov2000 is the archieve

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Thorsten Haude
Moin, "Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen." ^ That would be 'Leitkultur' now. Thorsten

Re: special reply_regexp

2000-12-14 Thread Josh Huber
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:12:37AM -0800, Gary Johnson wrote: [ifc-ml:] Re: [ifc-ml:] base subject reply ID base message ID I hope that was clear. I think the only solution available to us is to change the internals of

Re: question regarding gnupg in my regular signature

2000-12-14 Thread David T-G
Bryan, et al -- ...and then Bryan K. Walton said... % Hi, % I would first like to thank Graham, Brian, and Andrew for their responses to my question regarding clearsigning my emails. As you can see, this message is clearsigned. You may have intended for it to be clearsigned, but it was

Re: gnupg vs pgp? Really getting OT

2000-12-14 Thread Jesper Holmberg
* On Thursday, December 14, Thorsten Haude wrote: "Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen." ^ That would be 'Leitkultur' now. This 'Leitkultur' discussion you Germans are having these days does send chills down the spines of your fellow European neighbours. Jesper --

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Thorsten Haude
Moin, To get ontopic again: On 00-12-14, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: - - - [-- PGP-Ausgabe folgt (aktuelle Zeit: Thu Dec 14 21:04:32 2000) --] gpg: Unterschrift vom Don 14 Dez 2000 20:02:38 CET, DSA Schlüssel ID 90F89A7D gpg: Schlüssels 90F89A7D von wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net wird angefordert ... gpg: Keine

Re: gnupg vs pgp?

2000-12-14 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 09:05:53PM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: [-- PGP-Ausgabe folgt (aktuelle Zeit: Thu Dec 14 21:04:32 2000) --] gpg: Unterschrift vom Don 14 Dez 2000 20:02:38 CET, DSA Schlüssel ID 90F89A7D gpg: Schlüssels 90F89A7D von wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net wird angefordert ... gpg: Keine

Trying to wrap my messages at 72 characters

2000-12-14 Thread Bryan Walton
Hi, It has been advised that I set my .muttrc to wrap lines after 72 characters. I have looked into how to do this and have some questions for the list. I looked around on the web for how to do this and found the following: set editor ="vi -c 'set tw=72'" But this didn't work. vi told

Re: Trying to wrap my messages at 72 characters

2000-12-14 Thread Douglas L . Potts
Couple of things for you: Quoting Bryan Walton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, It has been advised that I set my .muttrc to wrap lines after 72 characters. I have looked into how to do this and have some questions for the list. I looked around on the web for how to do this and found the

Re: Trying to wrap my messages at 72 characters

2000-12-14 Thread Ken Weingold
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000, Bryan Walton wrote: But this didn't work. vi told me that it didn't understand tw. So I continued my search and found something that does work: set editor ="vi -c 'set wl=72'" vi understands the wl. However, when I begin to compose a message in mutt, the addition

Re: Trying to wrap my messages at 72 characters

2000-12-14 Thread Jeff Howie
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 03:53:59PM -0500, Douglas L . Potts wrote: set editor="vim -c ':0;/^To: '" it does a ':0' go to top of file, and then '/^To: ', search for first line that has To: in it at the very beginning. Whether or not you use the Mutt option to have the to/cc/etc lines in

Re: special reply_regexp

2000-12-14 Thread Gary Johnson
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 02:53:49PM -0500, Josh Huber wrote: On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:12:37AM -0800, Gary Johnson wrote: I think the only solution available to us is to change the internals of mutt to recognize this sort of mangled subject. Perhaps "we" could add a subject_ignore_regexp

mutt courier-imap

2000-12-14 Thread Michael MacDonald
Hi all. I'm currently trying to be happy with mutt running against courier-imapd, but I'm currently experiencing grief and frustration. Basically, what I want is to use procmail to split out mailing list mail into separate mailboxes like I was doing before I moved to imap. In my mutt config, I

Re: mutt courier-imap

2000-12-14 Thread Tabor J. Wells
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 06:21:34PM -0500, Michael MacDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] is thought to have said: Can anyone point me in a good direction for solving this problem? I'm frustrated because I can't seem to figure out if the problem is with configuration or if it's implementation problems

Re: Question regarding clearsigning emails automatically

2000-12-14 Thread Joe Philipps
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:03:13AM -0600, David Champion wrote: I think that signing all mail as a policy is a waste of resources and a potential source of annoyance, whether it's list mail or not. [...] anyone who is concerned about the validity of the message can check the signature if they