Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

On 07Jun2019 23:22, Kurt Hackenberg wrote: On 2019-06-07 07:22, Cameron Simpson wrote: If fetchmail's delivering to a programme, nothing prevents that being an arbitrary script to premangle a leading From_ line. Hmm. I've got a script in my bin directory called "unfrom_" for exactly this

forwarding in neomutt

The "forward-message" command appears not to work in Debian 9 (Stretch, neomutt); when I type ": forward-message" on the Neo-Mutt command line, the response is "forward-message: unknown command". Is neo-Mutt broken, or am I doing something wrong?

Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

On 2019-06-07 07:22, Cameron Simpson wrote: Are you looking in mbox files or in other places. [...] Hmm, my maildir message files also have From_ lines. If fetchmail's delivering to a programme, nothing prevents that being an arbitrary script to premangle a leading From_ line. Hmm. I've got

Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

On 2019-06-07 05:08, Frank Watt wrote: When I look at the headers of most mail, I see an mbox-style From line. Where do we make use of the 'reformat -f0' and "Return-Path" advice? In the stream of data that ends up on the standard input of the delivery agent (procmail, maildrop, whatever).

Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

* Cameron Simpson [06-07-19 19:43]: > On 07Jun2019 07:37, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > > * Cameron Simpson [06-07-19 07:24]: > > > It does look that way. I left procmail because I disliked its rule > > > syntax, > > > its totally regexp based matching system (ok for subject lines, ghastly > > >

Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

On 07Jun2019 07:37, Patrick Shanahan wrote: * Cameron Simpson [06-07-19 07:24]: It does look that way. I left procmail because I disliked its rule syntax, its totally regexp based matching system (ok for subject lines, ghastly for email addresses) and the performance cost incurred by it

Re: mailboxes - example

On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 07:15:49AM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 01:07:28PM +, Dan Ciprus (dciprus) wrote: > > Obviously all strings defined there are considered mailboxes even though > > there is no maildir structure nor mailbox file. > > Yes, that's exactly the

Re: mailboxes - example

On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 02:48:16PM +, Dan Ciprus (dciprus) wrote: Hm, at least there is some creative workaround :-) Thanks Kevin ! You're welcome. By the way it looks like I blew the example. The documentation is at and it

Re: mailboxes - example

Hm, at least there is some creative workaround :-) Thanks Kevin ! On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 07:15:49AM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 01:07:28PM +, Dan Ciprus (dciprus) wrote: Obviously all strings defined there are considered mailboxes even though there is no

Re: mailboxes - example

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 01:07:28PM +, Dan Ciprus (dciprus) wrote: Obviously all strings defined there are considered mailboxes even though there is no maildir structure nor mailbox file. Yes, that's exactly the problem. The sidebar is a list of mailboxes; there is no concept of dividers.

Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

* Patrick Shanahan [06-07-19 07:38]: > * Cameron Simpson [06-07-19 07:24]: > [...] > > How's fetchmail run by your system? Cron? Something else? > > not that fetchmail has a daemon, "fetchmail -d 150" runs every 150 > seconds. s/not/note -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield,

Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

* Cameron Simpson [06-07-19 07:24]: [...] > How's fetchmail run by your system? Cron? Something else? not that fetchmail has a daemon, "fetchmail -d 150" runs every 150 seconds. [...] > It does look that way. I left procmail because I disliked its rule syntax, > its totally regexp based

Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

On 07Jun2019 21:08, Frank Watt wrote: First of all, apologies for munging the thread: Gmail didn't deliver Cameron's response. I had to get the text from the archives. That seems to happen to me quite a bit. I harbour some suspicions to do with years of maintaining the adzapper project

Re: Compiling a newer version than the latest .deb package

First of all, apologies for munging the thread: Gmail didn't deliver Cameron's response. I had to get the text from the archives. Cameron Simpson wrote: [...] | Procmail generally relies on being installed in the user's ~/.forward | file to cause sendmail (the mail system) to deliver email