Re: command line encryption

2002-05-19 Thread Rocco Rutte
Hi, * David T-G [05/17/02 15:43:40 CEST] wrote: ...and then Rocco Rutte said... Well, yeah; the point was that we don't need mutt's cool features here since the mail interface isn't doing the encrypting. Right, we (isn't it still only me who wants to solve something ;-) don't need mutt at

mutt doesn't list new mail in symlinked maildirs

2002-05-19 Thread Alexander Skwar
Hello! Since I'm unable to make mutt 1.3.99 list mailboxes in hidden directories (see previous mail), I now tried to use normally named mailboxes which are symlinks. To do this, I've created a symlink from ML-MUTT-USERS to ML-MUTT-USERS (in the case of this mailinglist). My mailboxes line now

Re: Manipulate display of headers in browsers

2002-05-19 Thread Rocco Rutte
Hi, * Robert Wagner [05/19/02 11:14:52 CEST] wrote: how can I change the Subject shown in the browser? Since e.g. the mails coming from certain mailing lists are put in a dedicated folder by procmail, I do not need the preceeding string [mailing list blah] in the Subject to identify them.

Re: mutt doesn't list mailboxes in hidden files

2002-05-19 Thread Rocco Rutte
Hi, * Alexander Skwar [05/19/02 10:34:23 CEST] wrote: So I've set my mailboxes line to be: mailboxes ! +.ML-MUTT-USERS However, this doesn't work, because mutt doesn't seem to take mailboxes which begin with a Dot (.) (and are hidden because of this). If mutt didn't accept it, it would

Re: mutt doesn't list mailboxes in hidden files

2002-05-19 Thread Alexander Skwar
So sprach Rocco Rutte am 2002-05-19 um 12:55:56 +0200 : I guess you didn't touch the $mask variable. Maybe mutt does what you'd want it to do but just doesn't display anything because of your $mask. Oh, yes, you're right! I would have thought that the $mask only controls what's displayed in

Re: mutt doesn't list mailboxes in hidden files

2002-05-19 Thread Cameron Simpson
On 07:35 19 May 2002, Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | So sprach Rocco Rutte am 2002-05-19 um 12:55:56 +0200 : | I guess you didn't touch the $mask variable. Maybe mutt does | what you'd want it to do but just doesn't display anything | because of your $mask. | | Oh, yes, you're

Re: Manipulate display of headers in browsers

2002-05-19 Thread Cameron Simpson
On 12:47 19 May 2002, Rocco Rutte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | * Robert Wagner [05/19/02 11:14:52 CEST] wrote: | how can I change the Subject shown in the browser? Since e.g. the mails | coming from certain mailing lists are put in a dedicated folder by | procmail, I do not need the preceeding

Re: mutt doesn't list new mail in symlinked maildirs

2002-05-19 Thread Cameron Simpson
On 04:38 19 May 2002, Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Since I'm unable to make mutt 1.3.99 list mailboxes in hidden | directories (see previous mail), I now tried to use normally named | mailboxes which are symlinks. This is what I get for reading email backwards. | To do this, I've

Re: mutt doesn't list mailboxes in hidden files

2002-05-19 Thread Alexander Skwar
So sprach Cameron Simpson am 2002-05-20 um 10:17:56 +1000 : Or you would work around it with a symlink or you don't wan't to change $mask. Cheers, Well, the symlink trick also only works when $mask=.* - see my other mail. In the default $mask case, mutt doesn't look at the symlink target.

Re: mutt doesn't list new mail in symlinked maildirs

2002-05-19 Thread Alexander Skwar
So sprach Cameron Simpson am 2002-05-20 um 10:26:48 +1000 : This is what I get for reading email backwards. ;) SOunds like mutt's using lstat instad of stat. Probably a mistake in this instance. Yes, I agree. What if you swap the symlink around: rm ML-MUTT-USERS mv

Re: Manipulate display of headers in browsers

2002-05-19 Thread Jussi Ekholm
Rocco Rutte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Robert Wagner [05/19/02 11:14:52 CEST] wrote: how can I change the Subject shown in the browser? Since e.g. the mails coming from certain mailing lists are put in a dedicated folder by procmail, I do not need the preceeding string [mailing list blah]