Hi,
I'd like to create a message_hook based on from address that captures the
from address for use in the hook. Is that doable? I'd imagine something
like this:
message-hook ~f(.*) 'set editor=myeditor -f \1'
In this contrived example, I'd like to pass the value of the From:
field as an
Hello Chip,
On Sat, Dec 04, 2010 at 05:08:38PM -0800, Chip Camden wrote:
I'd like to create a message_hook based on from address that captures the
from address for use in the hook. Is that doable? I'd imagine something
like this:
message-hook ~f(.*) 'set editor=myeditor -f \1'
+1
I also
'folder-hook . XXX' certainly works!
Thanks, folks ;)
Clay
--
Isaac Claymore /\ASCII Ribbon Campaign
Dawning Inc.\ /Respect for open standards
Beijing, China X No HTML/RTF in email
http://www.dawning.com.cn / \No
* Isaac Claymore [EMAIL PROTECTED] [09-30-02 23:31]:
It seems that folder-hook is executed whenever a folder is entered,
but is there a 'leave-folder-hook'? I need to reset something back to
normal upon leaving a folder, after setting it to folder-specific
value in a folder-hook.
I cant
Hi Isaac,
* Isaac Claymore [EMAIL PROTECTED] [27. Sep. 2002]:
It seems that folder-hook is executed whenever a folder is entered,
but is there a 'leave-folder-hook'?
Notwendig, but there is hope:
I need to reset something back to normal upon leaving a folder,
after setting it to
Hi, mutters.
It seems that folder-hook is executed whenever a folder is entered,
but is there a 'leave-folder-hook'? I need to reset something back to
normal upon leaving a folder, after setting it to folder-specific
value in a folder-hook.
I cant seem to find such a hook, did I missed
* Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-16 14:11]:
BTW, doesn't ..* do the same as .+ ?
it depends. really - it all depends on
the language you currently have available.
I was talking about Mutt ;)
So was I. more specifically, I was
Hi,
* Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Hi!
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-18 08:18]:
send-hook ! . 'my_hdr From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
try again. does it work now?
Nope...
send-hook ~t . 'my_hdr From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
send-hook ! ~t . 'my_hdr
* David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Jerome --
...and then Jerome De Greef said...
%
% I think I have the solution:
Yay!
%
% send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
% send-hook !'~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Does this
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-16 09:25]:
% send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
% send-hook !'~t .*' 'my_hdr From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Does this work, or do you think it should?
I'd expect that you'd need ..* in your
patterns instead of just .* 'cuz
* Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-16 09:25]:
% send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
% send-hook !'~t .*' 'my_hdr From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Does this work, or do you think it should?
I'd expect that you'd need
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-16 14:11]:
BTW, doesn't ..* do the same as .+ ?
it depends. really - it all depends on
the language you currently have available.
I was talking about Mutt ;)
So was I. more specifically, I was talking about
the regular expression library
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2002-03-15 08:20 -0500:
send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
send-hook !'~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
The first hook is used whenever I hit 'r' and there is a 'To:' line
followed by any address.
* Andre Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-16 18:34]:
I would like to set my Bcc headers on that basis,
but it seems to work randomly only!
send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr Bcc: mymail'
send-hook !'~t .*' 'unmy_hdr Bcc'
I would be very happy if anyone could tell me what to do in
order to
* Sven Guckes [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2002-03-16 20:26 -0500:
* Andre Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-16 18:34]:
I would like to set my Bcc headers on that basis,
but it seems to work randomly only!
send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr Bcc: mymail'
send-hook !'~t .*' 'unmy_hdr Bcc'
I would be
I think I have the solution:
send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
send-hook !'~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
The first hook is used whenever I hit 'r' and there is a 'To:' line
followed by any address.
The second hook is used when I hit 'F'
Jerome --
...and then Jerome De Greef said...
%
% I think I have the solution:
Yay!
%
% send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
% send-hook !'~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Does this work, or do you think it should? I'd expect that you'd
Ok, I've got a send-hook like this:
send-hook ([EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]) set pgp_create_traditional
However, it still makes the MIME-type application:pgp.
Is there a way to make it lie and call them text?
Crackmonkey bounces funky MIME-types.
msg25576/pgp0.pgp
Description:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Shawn McMahon on Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 12:38:02PM -0500:
Ok, I've got a send-hook like this:
send-hook ([EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]) set
pgp_create_traditional
However, it still makes the MIME-type application:pgp.
Is there
This one time, at band camp, Justin R. Miller wrote:
You need to either use a macro to pipe to gpg, or you need to try the
Outlook compatibility patch. I believe that the patch was going to be
rolled into the main distribution?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding things, but it seems to me that
Shawn --
...and then Shawn McMahon said...
%
% This one time, at band camp, Justin R. Miller wrote:
%
% You need to either use a macro to pipe to gpg, or you need to try the
% Outlook compatibility patch. I believe that the patch was going to be
...
%
% What am I missing here?
Please
Hi,
I use the nntp patch from vvv.
I have folder hooks to change my email for the newsgroups to avoid spam.
When i press F to write a follow-up, my address is changed accordingly.
Now my question is: is there a way to have my 'normal address' used when
I hit 'r' to personnaly reply to a
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2002-03-14 09:13 -0500:
Hi,
I use the nntp patch from vvv.
I have folder hooks to change my email for the newsgroups to avoid spam.
When i press F to write a follow-up, my address is changed accordingly.
Now my question is: is there a way to have my
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2002-03-14 09:13 -0500:
Hi,
I use the nntp patch from vvv.
I have folder hooks to change my email for the newsgroups to avoid spam.
When i press F to write a follow-up, my address is changed accordingly.
Now my question is: is there a way to have my
Andre, et al --
...and then Andre Berger said...
%
% folder-hook nntp send-hook '~t ^.*$' 'my_hdr From: news'
% folder-hook !nntp send-hook '~t ^.*$' 'my_hdr From: mail'
Since one doesn't change folders without leaving the folder, you might
say, couldn't the send-hooks be left out and you just
* Andre Berger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
* Jerome De Greef [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2002-03-14 09:13 -0500:
Hi,
I use the nntp patch from vvv.
I have folder hooks to change my email for the newsgroups to avoid spam.
When i press F to write a follow-up, my address is changed accordingly.
* On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 05:40:21PM -0800,
* Gary Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is what I use:
folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-users 'macro index M :push
mail^[EMAIL PROTECTED]^M^M mail to list'
^^
Can't you just leave this part out?
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 10:18:10AM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
* On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 05:40:21PM -0800,
* Gary Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is what I use:
folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-users 'macro index M :push
mail^[EMAIL PROTECTED]^M^M mail to list'
Hi, I'm wanting to do something like this guy did (apparently):
http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/dot-mutt/folderhooks
And have a rule that makes it so that when I press m while in a certain
folder, the message already has the list (say, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) at
the To: header for me. Since the method
* On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 06:12:00PM -0200,
* Carlos Laviola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, I'm wanting to do something like this guy did (apparently):
http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/dot-mutt/folderhooks
Sorry I can't look at the website, because I have no
webaccess at the moment.
And have a
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Carlos Laviola wrote:
Hi, I'm wanting to do something like this guy did (apparently):
http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/dot-mutt/folderhooks
And have a rule that makes it so that when I press m while in a certain
folder, the message already has the list (say, [EMAIL
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 03:26:32PM -0600, Knute wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Carlos Laviola wrote:
Hi, I'm wanting to do something like this guy did (apparently):
http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/dot-mutt/folderhooks
And have a rule that makes it so that when I press m while in a certain
On 18:12 15 Feb 2002, Carlos Laviola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| And have a rule that makes it so that when I press m while in a certain
| folder, the message already has the list (say, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) at
| the To: header for me. Since the method used by Han doesn't seem to
| work, I ask you
yes, i have considered prcomail and other such filtering, but i would like the mail to
stay in my inbox, and when i have read it, i like to hit "s" "enter"...lazy and
quick...
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 11:00:23PM -0500, John P. Verel wrote:
On 01/12/01, 10:27:19PM -0500, Okan Demirmen - mutt
newbie-type: some patience required, unless stupidity is too obvious...
can a save-hook have a regex in it?...if so, i might be totally clueless...
i am trying to save mail to folders, whose names are based on a mailing list...wihtout
creating a save-hook for every single mailing list
i
I'd like that all the outgoing mail to a certain e.mail address are
saved automatically in a special folder instead of in the outbox
one.
Is it possible? If yes, how?
Thanks for replying
.oesse.
--
--
Marco Giardini
Big Brother tells me that Marco Giardini wrote:
I'd like that all the outgoing mail to a certain e.mail address are
saved automatically in a special folder instead of in the outbox
one.
Is it possible? If yes, how?
Thanks for replying
fcc-hook [EMAIL PROTECTED] +special-folder
--
"Restore
On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 12:51:31AM -0400, David T-G wrote:
Hal --
...and then Hal Burgiss said...
%
% Yea, it works fine with autoedit off, but I like autoedit too :(
What does autoedit get you that you can't have otherwise? Do you have
edit_hdrs set, maybe, and like to play with your
mostly I think the autoedit is a bit easier
(ie I am lazy :), especially when replying. The 'To' and 'Subject'
normally have already been decided in this case. I rarely change To or
Subject on a reply. Now, for a new mail, it makes perfect sense.
Perhaps you are
On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 03:52:49PM +0200, Ulf Erikson wrote:
mostly I think the autoedit is a bit easier
(ie I am lazy :), especially when replying. The 'To' and 'Subject'
normally have already been decided in this case. I rarely change To or
Subject on a reply.
Hal --
...and then Hal Burgiss said...
%
% Yea, it works fine with autoedit off, but I like autoedit too :(
What does autoedit get you that you can't have otherwise? Do you have
edit_hdrs set, maybe, and like to play with your headers there?
I find that edit_hdrs lets me muck around to my
Hal Burgiss muttered:
do you have 'autoedit' set?
He does. And that's why the send-hooks do not work. So, Hal the solution is
obvious - give up that autoedit stuff.
Yea, it works fine with autoedit off, but I like autoedit too :(
You confuse me with your from header for a minute ;)
On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 07:27:38PM +0200, Michael Tatge wrote:
Hal Burgiss muttered:
I don't have a clue how combine autoedit and send-hooks. Harold says
it is possible so maybe you should start a new muttrc from scratch
and you'll see which line confuses mutt.
Sounds challenging. Would
Hal Burgiss muttered:
Should the below not work? I could swear it used to ;) Recently even.
Despite much playing with this, I cannot get the header to handle the
exceptions.
unset use_from
Don't know why you do that, but according to the docs it shouldn't
hurt. It might be worth testing
On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 01:30:40AM -0600, Harold Oga wrote:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 11:29:30PM -0400, Hal Burgiss wrote:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 06:25:47PM -0600, Harold Oga wrote:
send-hook . 'my_hdr From: Hal Burgiss [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
send-hook '~C redhat-list' 'my_hdr From: Hal
On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 11:45:33AM +0200, Michael Tatge wrote:
Hal Burgiss muttered:
Should the below not work? I could swear it used to ;) Recently even.
Despite much playing with this, I cannot get the header to handle the
exceptions.
unset use_from
Don't know why you do that,
On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 11:45:33AM +0200, Michael Tatge wrote:
Hal Burgiss muttered:
unset use_from
Don't know why you do that, but according to the docs it shouldn't
hurt. It might be worth testing without this line, though.
Still no go.
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL
do you have 'autoedit' set? if you do, here's what happens: when you hit
'm' to start a message, there is no recipient specified, so 'from' gets set
to the default value. you have to let mutt prompt for the recipient before
you edit, so that it can set the 'from' header.
peter
On 5 Oct 00,
Dan Boger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Thu, 05 Oct 2000:
FWIW, I've been trying to do something very similar... mutt 1.2.5i
send-hook . 'set [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
send-hook .*lugnet\.com 'set [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
from what I can tell, the send hook DOES work, only AFTER I actually send
the
Peter Jaques muttered:
Please post your whole muttrc.
http://feenix.eyep.net/xstuff/muttrc
do you have 'autoedit' set?
He does. And that's why the send-hooks do not work. So, Hal the solution is
obvious - give up that autoedit stuff.
HTH,
Michael
--
Our informal mission is to improve
On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 08:08:48PM +0200, Hal Burgiss wrote:
Peter Jaques muttered:
Please post your whole muttrc.
http://feenix.eyep.net/xstuff/muttrc
do you have 'autoedit' set?
He does. And that's why the send-hooks do not work. So, Hal the solution is
obvious - give up that autoedit
On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 08:08:48PM +0200, Hal Burgiss wrote:
Peter Jaques muttered:
Please post your whole muttrc.
http://feenix.eyep.net/xstuff/muttrc
do you have 'autoedit' set?
He does. And that's why the send-hooks do not work. So, Hal the solution is
obvious - give up that
Should the below not work? I could swear it used to ;) Recently even.
Despite much playing with this, I cannot get the header to handle the
exceptions.
unset use_from
send-hook . 'my_hdr From: Hal Burgiss [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
send-hook redhat-list 'my_hdr From: Hal Burgiss [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 07:58:13PM -0400, Hal Burgiss wrote:
Should the below not work? I could swear it used to ;) Recently even.
Despite much playing with this, I cannot get the header to handle the
exceptions.
unset use_from
send-hook . 'my_hdr From: Hal Burgiss [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
send-hook
Would it be possible to setup a save-hook that would open the
browser in a specific subdirectory so that I could easily the right
mailbox?
TIA,
Adahma
Adahma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Thu, 08 Jun 2000:
Would it be possible to setup a save-hook that would open the
browser in a specific subdirectory so that I could easily the right
mailbox?
I just tried this:
save-hook "~f adahma" +foo
... and created the directory ~/Mail/foo
When I
Adahma --
...and then Adahma said...
% Would it be possible to setup a save-hook that would open the
% browser in a specific subdirectory so that I could easily the right
% mailbox?
It sounds like what you want is a macro, but perhaps you might want a
save-hook that changes the directory based
Hello!
You seem to be using the compressed folders patch?
I'll look into it.
Quoting r. Stewart V. Wright ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) "Save-hook question":
Hi all,
...
As a second question - how can I convince mutt that there is new mail
in compressed folders? I have procmail deliver
Stewart V. Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
fcc-save-hook ~A +People/%O.gz
However, recently one of my correspondents has had their email name
changed to all capitals, so now rather than being saved in
People/personx.gz
mutt wants to create
People/PERSONX.gz
Someone
Hi all,
I have the following hook set in my .muttrc :
fcc-save-hook~A +People/%O.gz
Effectively unless I specify it elsewhere my mail gets saved to
People/MailName.gz
However, recently one of my correspondents has had their email name
changed to all capitals, so now rather
Richard P. Groenewegen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
send-hook '~t [EMAIL PROTECTED]' 'whatever'
but I'll only want this send-hook to work if [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the only
recipient.
Isn't there a pattern modifier "^" that means "only"?
send-hook '^~t [EMAIL PROTECTED]' 'whatever'
On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 07:10:25 +0100, Richard P. Groenewegen wrote:
Hi,
Here's something that's either trivial or impossible. I want
something like
send-hook '~t [EMAIL PROTECTED]' 'whatever'
but I'll only want this send-hook to work if [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the only
Hi,
Here's something that's either trivial or impossible. I want
something like
send-hook '~t [EMAIL PROTECTED]' 'whatever'
but I'll only want this send-hook to work if [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the only
recipient.
On a related note: how do I limit to all messages send to [EMAIL
Salvatore Greco wrote:
I am having a syntax hassle with my send-hooks after and upgrade.
Below is a snippet of some of my send-hooks
-- [send-hooks from .muttrc]
send-hook '~A' 'set signature=~/.signature; my_hdr From: Salvatore Greco
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; my_hdr Reply-To: [EMAIL
Good day :)
I am having a syntax hassle with my send-hooks after and upgrade.
Below is a snippet of some of my send-hooks
-- [send-hooks from .muttrc]
send-hook '~A' 'set signature=~/.signature; my_hdr From: Salvatore Greco
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; my_hdr Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
send-hook
On 990720, at 14:40:58, Robert Chien wrote:
basically, i want to set signature to .signature.work when sending email
to people at work, and set signature to just .signature for the rest.
[...] when i send email to co-workers, i can address it as "foo" or
"foo@west" (notice the unqualified
Robert Chien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
basically, i want to set signature to .signature.work when sending email
to people at work, and set signature to just .signature for the rest.
I do that, too. Here's my setup:
I want to use "localsig" if the message is one in which ALL of the
recipients
hello mutt users,
i need some help with using hook in the following situation:
basically, i want to set signature to .signature.work when sending email
to people at work, and set signature to just .signature for the rest.
i've been playing with different hooks without any success, because it's
I'm looking to do something resembling the following pseudo-code:
I have some arbitrary field, say sender (~e in mutt)
I want to say:
~e =~ /^(.*)@(.*)$/
if -d $2, then savehook becomes $2/$1.
Suggestions, or time to look at hacking in a feature?
(As soon as I can get autoconf to behave...)
69 matches
Mail list logo
