Re: Procmail Nesting

2007-10-10 Thread Rem P Roberti
On 2007.10.10 17:46:58 +, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wednesday, October 10 at 03:29 PM, quoth Rem P Roberti: > > Is it possible to use curly braces to nest conditions? For example, > > there are two addresses that can be used for the FreeBSD

Re: Order of send-hook and folder-hook options.

2007-10-10 Thread Gary Johnson
On 2007-10-10, Benjamin A'Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm trying to set up hooks to modify my From address. I have two > conditions. > > a) If I'm in a specific folder (in this case =lists) or its subfolders, > use Address B. > b) If I'm sending to a specific domain, use Address C. > > Ot

Re: Procmail Nesting

2007-10-10 Thread Kyle Wheeler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, October 10 at 03:29 PM, quoth Rem P Roberti: > Is it possible to use curly braces to nest conditions? For example, > there are two addresses that can be used for the FreeBSD mailing > list to which I subscribe, and I would like to inco

Re: Order of send-hook and folder-hook options.

2007-10-10 Thread Kyle Wheeler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, October 10 at 11:00 PM, quoth Benjamin A'Lee: >I can do a): > > folder-hook . my_hdr From: address_a > folder-hook =lists my_hdr From: address_b > >Or, I can do b): > > send-hook . my_hdr From:

Re: Procmail Nesting

2007-10-10 Thread Patrick Shanahan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * Rem P Roberti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [10-10-07 18:30]: > Is it possible to use curly braces to nest conditions? yes > For example, there are two addresses that can be used for the FreeBSD > mailing list to which I subscribe, and I would like to inco

Procmail Nesting

2007-10-10 Thread Rem P Roberti
Is it possible to use curly braces to nest conditions? For example, there are two addresses that can be used for the FreeBSD mailing list to which I subscribe, and I would like to incorporate them both into the same recipe. Rem

Order of send-hook and folder-hook options.

2007-10-10 Thread Benjamin A'Lee
I'm trying to set up hooks to modify my From address. I have two conditions. a) If I'm in a specific folder (in this case =lists) or its subfolders, use Address B. b) If I'm sending to a specific domain, use Address C. Otherwise, use address A. I can do a): folder-hook . my_h

Re: Procmail

2007-10-10 Thread Breen Mullins
* Nicolas Rachinsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-10 09:28 +0200]: * Breen Mullins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-09 19:05 -0700]: MAILDIR by itself isn't special in procmail. You usually set it so that you can use it in your delivery recipes: It is special. Quoting procmailrc(5): Indeed, as

Re: O'Reilly type - Quick Reference

2007-10-10 Thread Joseph
On 10/10/07 21:41, Rado S wrote: > =- Joseph wrote on Wed 10.Oct'07 at 13:15:09 -0600 -= > > > Does anybody have a link or knows where to find a Quick Reference > > type help page for mutt similar like O'Reilly has; especially the search > > patterns and other items not listed under help menu ?

Re: O'Reilly type - Quick Reference

2007-10-10 Thread Rado S
=- Joseph wrote on Wed 10.Oct'07 at 13:15:09 -0600 -= > Does anybody have a link or knows where to find a Quick Reference > type help page for mutt similar like O'Reilly has; especially the search > patterns and other items not listed under help menu ? I've seen links on the wiki > Old mutt us

O'Reilly type - Quick Reference

2007-10-10 Thread Joseph
Does anybody have a link or knows where to find a Quick Reference type help page for mutt similar like O'Reilly has; especially the search patterns and other items not listed under help menu ? I'm sure it is not possible to squeeze it all under one page, so several pages would be OK, and in colo

Re: Procmail

2007-10-10 Thread Breen Mullins
* Kyle Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-09 21:23 -0500]: On Tuesday, October 9 at 07:05 PM, quoth Breen Mullins: MAILDIR by itself isn't special in procmail. On the contrary, MAILDIR *IS* special. Reread the procmail documentation. Specifically: Right, of course. Thanks. (I knew that,

Re: Mutt to access emails from pst?

2007-10-10 Thread Andrew Haninger
On 10/8/07, Sander Smeenk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm happy you CC'd the list. The 'bad part' is CC'ing the Original > Poster. As he/she is likely to be subscribed to the list too. > > List replies are good. Direct replies are bad. However, list+direct replies allow you to flag a list message

Re: "toggle-old"

2007-10-10 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Kyle Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.10.1305 +0100]: > That doesn't make much sense to me. If I have a read message and I say > "toggle-new", why would mutt assume that I really wanted to > "toggle-old"? Perhaps what's needed is a different function? Sure. I am not talking abou

Re: "toggle-old"

2007-10-10 Thread Kyle Wheeler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, October 10 at 12:54 PM, quoth martin f krafft: >also sprach Kyle Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.10.1245 +0100]: >> current next >> >> !O & !N N <--- This is the crucial difference, right? >

Re: "toggle-old"

2007-10-10 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Kyle Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.10.1245 +0100]: > current next > > !O & !N N <--- This is the crucial difference, right? Almost, but yes. My argument is that this behaviour should depend on $mark_old. If that's set, the result should

Re: "toggle-old"

2007-10-10 Thread Kyle Wheeler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, October 10 at 11:59 AM, quoth martin f krafft: >also sprach Michael Tatge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.10.1140 +0100]: >> I'm confused. Do you want to remove the Old (and New) flag or set N for >> a messages that was previously Old? > >Id

Re: "toggle-old"

2007-10-10 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Michael Tatge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.10.1140 +0100]: > I'm confused. Do you want to remove the Old (and New) flag or set N for > a messages that was previously Old? Ideally, I want to press N to do any of the following, depending on context: current next ~~~

Re: "toggle-old"

2007-10-10 Thread Michael Tatge
* On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered: > also sprach Michael Tatge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.10.0720 +0100]: > > Don't use . N removes the N flag if it's there > > but doesn't add N if the message is not N. > > If your goal is "O"ld messages anyway why have toggle-n

Re: "toggle-old"

2007-10-10 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Michael Tatge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.10.0720 +0100]: > Don't use . N removes the N flag if it's there > but doesn't add N if the message is not N. > If your goal is "O"ld messages anyway why have toggle-new at all? Can you think of another way to toggle, which I've been using for

Re: Procmail

2007-10-10 Thread Nicolas Rachinsky
* Breen Mullins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-09 19:05 -0700]: > MAILDIR by itself isn't special in procmail. You usually set it so that > you can use it in your delivery recipes: It is special. Quoting procmailrc(5): MAILDIR Current directory while procmail is executing (that means

Re: hide pgp or smime signatures ?

2007-10-10 Thread Nicolas KOWALSKI
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 02:31:48PM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote: > > > On 2007-10-09, Nicolas KOWALSKI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Is it possible to not display the pgp or smime signature at all in > > > > the pager ? > This is what I actually use when reading the mutt lists. > > folder-hook