Re: [OT-ish] Want command line program to selectively delete emails
On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 01:57:04AM +1000, Nemo Thorx wrote: > Quoting Ed Blackman from 04 Aug (a Friday in 2023) at 1434 hours... > > Any suggestions for a command line program to select emails for > > deletion based on command line options? I specifically want one that > > can remove emails that were received more than X days ago, but can > > also express "but don't delete if they're flagged". > > > > > I could call mutt (see, kinda OT!) with "-e" to tag, delete, sync, and > > quit, but that seems fiddly and heavyweight. > > But if it's being run from cron overnight or something, are you ever > going to notice? > > > I could give up on using the message headers to determine the message > > date, learn how filenames are constructed in Maildir (to read the > > flags) and use a shell script built around "find". > > I'm reasonably confident that all filenames (before the ':') are only > convention (I convert an nntp spool to maildir and name them according > to my own naming convention which everything (well, mutt and dovecot) > then honours), and mtime is unused by anything and/or not to be trusted. > > So honetsly, I'd suggest mutt's -e, since it gives you mutt's pattern > matching which is much more powerful than archivemail (admittedly, > I only used that for trivial stuff and only many years ago) and likely > more than anything else available. > > eg, instead of just "received more than X days ago and not flagged", > mutt can let you select/ignore whole threads based on those parameters, > and others alike. eg, I once had archiving setup on a folder-hook thus: > > folder-hook !(Maildir$|archive|search|mfolder|.r.) 'push > "t~m 600- !~(~m -600) !~(~r <32d) !~(~N) !~(~F) > !~D^.archivet"' > > To decode that: sort reverse threaded, select all messages after the > first 600, but not if it's part of a thread within the first 600, not if > it's in a thread with messages received in the last 32 days, not if it's > in a thread with messages marked 'New' or 'Flagged', and not if it's > a message already marked delete. Then save to the archive mailbox and > established my desired sorting and thread collapse visibility. > > Basically - I wanted a thread-preserving archiving mechanism, and mutt's > thread-aware pattern matching gave it to me. (I didn't include sync in > that setup, preferring at the time to let that occur with mailbox > closing) > > In a delete scenario as you're seeking, I'd suggest a multi-step process > which first archives threads you've contributed to - and only then > deleting old ignorable threads. > > Sure It's fiddly - which is your argument against using mutt. > > ...But it's powerful - which is my argument for using mutt! > > Aside - I used folder-hook before because I didn't know of the "-e" > option, and I stopped using it because I found I was often using mutt as > a mailbox debug tool, and this was just getting in the way. I can see > myself going down the rabbithole and reimplementing my old archiver now > (where "now" is "sometime in the next few months, maybe" :) Another very late reply to this thread, but I happen to have implemented almost exactly the concept you're describing. It's a python3 script that deletes whole threads that meet the criteria: - All messages are markes as read - No messages in the thread are unread - No messages in the thread are flagged (starred) - All messages in the thread are older than N days It's been several years since I've looked at this code (which in my mind is a good thing, since that means it hasn't broken), so definitely give it a read-over to see if it's suitable for your purposes. In my case, I run it directly on the mail server via a systemd service and timer. https://seangreenslade.com/source-code/scripts/list-thread-pruner/listthreadpruner-v0.1.py Happy to answer any questions about the code if anyone is curious or wants to use it. --Sean
Re: trouble with sending emails from alternate email account
On February 12, 2022 9:58:50 PM PST, Ranjan Maitra wrote: >Hi, > >I am using the browser (sorry) to send this e-mail because I am no >longer able to send email from mutt from anything other than my office >account (which uses smtp and is delivered via postfix). > >So, here is what I have in my .muttrc at the very end. > > >folder-hook . 'unset smtp_url' >folder-hook '(mutt|R|fedora|postfix|fetchmail|openbox|sylpheed)' 'set >from = t...@email.com; set >smtp_url="smtps://t...@email.com@smtp.mail.com:465/"; set >smtp_pass="xxx"; set envelope_from_address="t...@email.com"; >set use_envelope_from=yes; set from = "t...@email.com"; set >forward_format = "[FW frm %a:%s]"; set realname = ""; my_hdr Bcc: ""; >set ssl_force_tls = yes; set ssl_starttls = yes' > > > >The password is correctly entered (and this configuration worked fine, >in the sense that it delivered email from this account a few weeks ago. >This has not worked for a few weeks and I finally decided to try and >see if anyone had suggestions. > > > >I am on Mutt 2.1.5 and on a full up to date Fedora 35. > > > >I tried debugging and get. > > > >2022-02-12 23:18:26] External SSF: 256 >[2022-02-12 23:18:26] External authentication name: t...@email.com >[2022-02-12 23:18:26] mutt_sasl_cb_authname: getting authname for >smtp.mail.com:465 >[2022-02-12 23:18:26] mutt_sasl_cb_authname: getting user for >smtp.mail.com:465 >[2022-02-12 23:18:26] mutt_sasl_cb_pass: getting password for >mai...@email.com@smtp.mail.com:465 >[2022-02-12 23:18:26] Authenticating (PLAIN)... >[2022-02-12 23:18:26] 5> AUTH PLAIN (removed) >[2022-02-12 23:18:27] 5< 535 Authentication credentials invalid >[2022-02-12 23:18:27] 5< 535 Authentication credentials invalid One possibility is that your email provider may have disabled normal password auth. I know that both Office365 and GSuite offer a setting to enable or disable using your account password for authentication, with the desired alternative being oauth. I don't remember offhand if there is a way to use oauth with mutt, but these providers will often provide an "app-specific password" mechanism as an alternative. Another thought is to switch to the submission port 587 if the provider offers it. Based on your error messages I doubt it's the issue, but it does provide a small security boost by removing the possibility of STARTTLS stripping attacks. --Sean
Re: Creating HTML emails with mutt
On October 30, 2019 7:41:34 AM PDT, Patrick Shanahan wrote: >* Sean Greenslade [10-30-19 10:37]: >> On October 30, 2019 5:29:01 AM PDT, Patrick Shanahan > wrote: >> >* Mark H. Wood [10-30-19 08:26]: >> >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:37:43PM +1300, martin f krafft wrote: >> >> >I'd love to see some statistics about the age of mutt users. >> >> >> >> 62 >> > >> >78 >> >> Not sure if these are guesses at the average or reported data points. >If >> it's the latter, I'll offer my own: >> >> 26 > >since the request was rather non-specific and limited to only those >interested in reading the thread, not sure it makes any difference. >almost like polling results related by politicians. Of course there's massive selection bias in this list. No question about that. I just wanted to point out that there definitely are some younger Mutters out there. Though I tend to fall more on the grumpy about HTML mails side of this argument, so maybe age isn't that relevant. --Sean
Re: Creating HTML emails with mutt
On October 30, 2019 5:29:01 AM PDT, Patrick Shanahan wrote: >* Mark H. Wood [10-30-19 08:26]: >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:37:43PM +1300, martin f krafft wrote: >> >I'd love to see some statistics about the age of mutt users. >> >> 62 > >78 Not sure if these are guesses at the average or reported data points. If it's the latter, I'll offer my own: 26 --Sean
