On 09Dec2014 10:33, Chris Green wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:21:31PM +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 08Dec2014 22:04, Chris Green wrote:
>Doesn't anyone use IMAP? I must admit when I tried it (a few times
>over the years, but not very recently) it never felt quite as easy and
>transpare
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:04:26PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > Hello, Chris,
> >
> > What I do is that at work, I mount my home mail folder using sshfs. That
> > way, I
> > can use my local copies of mutt, xpdf, etc. With large messages, it can get
> > slow, sometimes, but it does save some tim
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:38:18PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:30:46AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > * Chris Green [12-08-14 10:21]:
> > > E.g. if I want to view an HTML E-Mail in Firefox (default browser)
> > > instead of within mutt (using lynx) can I just do 'v'
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:19:55PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> At the moment to access my mail remotely I ssh into the server and run
> mutt. This works well in general but there are some disadvantages, in
> particular the 'v' command to access and view HTML, PDF and other
[...]
>
> So, I'm wonde
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 11:42:49AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > If we all misunderstood and you have multiple instances of mutt running and
> > want to be able to access your mail from any of them then use POP and leave
> > the email on the server. Are you forced to use IMAP?
> >
> I currently r
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 11:36:48AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:56:04AM +, John Long wrote:
> > > > If I understood you then yes, but the local machine as far as mutt is
> > > > concerned is the machine where mutt is running [your remote system], not
> > > > where you
Thanks everyone for all the ideas and feedback.
I *think* I have a solution that will work for me.
I'll change the default mutt temporary directory to something that I
can mount easily on the laptop using sshfs, as long as this has a
unique name that can be the same on the desktop server and on t
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:57:33AM +, John Long wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:33:05AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:21:31PM +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> > > On 08Dec2014 22:04, Chris Green wrote:
> > > >Doesn't anyone use IMAP? I must admit when I tried it
convenience/ease of doing what I do at the
moment (ssh to remote, run mutt there) and running mutt on the local
laptop and using IMAP. It seems as if IMAP will overcome a couple of
the niggles of ssh/mutt but I'm not sure if it's worth the extra
hassle of running an IMAP server and pu
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:11:53AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:07:10AM +, John Long wrote:
> > > > I don't see how IMAP helps. What exactly is the difference in terms of
> > > > how
> > > > you read mail and where the apps run as opposed to POP? The only thing
> > >
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:33:05AM +, Chris Green wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:21:31PM +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> > On 08Dec2014 22:04, Chris Green wrote:
> > >Doesn't anyone use IMAP? I must admit when I tried it (a few times
> > >over the years, but not very recently) it never f
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:21:31PM +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 08Dec2014 22:04, Chris Green wrote:
> >Doesn't anyone use IMAP? I must admit when I tried it (a few times
> >over the years, but not very recently) it never felt quite as easy and
> >transparent as using mutt on a local mail sp
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:07:10AM +, John Long wrote:
> > > I don't see how IMAP helps. What exactly is the difference in terms of how
> > > you read mail and where the apps run as opposed to POP? The only thing
> > > IMAP
> > > does it make you rely on a remote mail server. I never use IMAP
Hi Cameron,
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:21:31PM +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote:
>
> For me this is all theoretical so far as I have not had time. But it is a
> real issue I need to address, and I'd like to hear of your efforts if you
> try this route.
I have been doing this for some years now, with
On 08Dec2014 22:04, Chris Green wrote:
Doesn't anyone use IMAP? I must admit when I tried it (a few times
over the years, but not very recently) it never felt quite as easy and
transparent as using mutt on a local mail spool.
I would advocate trying offlineimap. I am a huge fan of having one'
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 09:59:17PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 06:33:40PM +, John Long wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:19:55PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > > I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
> > > mail spool. Mail is delivered
* Chris Green [2014-12-08 17:09 -0500]:
Doesn't anyone use IMAP? I must admit when I tried it (a few times
over the years, but not very recently) it never felt quite as easy and
transparent as using mutt on a local mail spool.
I stopped using IMAP directly a while ago, and started using offli
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 06:40:15PM -0300, Eduardo Alvarez wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:19:55PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
> > mail spool. Mail is delivered to my system by SMTP (postfix locally).
> >
> > At the moment
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 06:33:40PM +, John Long wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:19:55PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
> > mail spool. Mail is delivered to my system by SMTP (postfix locally).
> >
> > At the moment to ac
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:19:55PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
> mail spool. Mail is delivered to my system by SMTP (postfix locally).
>
> At the moment to access my mail remotely I ssh into the server and run
> mutt. This wor
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:19:55PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
> mail spool. Mail is delivered to my system by SMTP (postfix locally).
>
> At the moment to access my mail remotely I ssh into the server and run
> mutt.
I suspec
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 12:15:06PM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Chris Green [12-08-14 11:52]:
> > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 11:12:27AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> [...]
> > > >From *outside* I utilize fish:///local/directory/...
> > > Usually the html files are not that large and doing t
* Chris Green [12-08-14 11:52]:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 11:12:27AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
[...]
> > >From *outside* I utilize fish:///local/directory/...
> > Usually the html files are not that large and doing the transfer in the
> > background, you can continue doing something else rat
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 11:12:27AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Chris Green [12-08-14 10:40]:
> > > I work somewhat similarily. I store all mail on my local box and maintain
> > > a tmux session which I access remotely via ssh -X. I can view html using
> > > the home machine's browser remo
* Chris Green [12-08-14 10:40]:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:30:46AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > * Chris Green [12-08-14 10:21]:
> > > I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
> > > mail spool. Mail is delivered to my system by SMTP (postfix locally).
> > >
>
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:30:46AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Chris Green [12-08-14 10:21]:
> > I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
> > mail spool. Mail is delivered to my system by SMTP (postfix locally).
> >
> > At the moment to access my mail remotely
* Chris Green [12-08-14 10:21]:
> I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
> mail spool. Mail is delivered to my system by SMTP (postfix locally).
>
> At the moment to access my mail remotely I ssh into the server and run
> mutt. This works well in general but there
I have been using mutt for many, many years with a local (Unix style)
mail spool. Mail is delivered to my system by SMTP (postfix locally).
At the moment to access my mail remotely I ssh into the server and run
mutt. This works well in general but there are some disadvantages, in
particular the
* Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Am 2008-01-08 22:53:10, schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter:
> > Almost a week gone by and nobody picked this mail up.
>
> :-) Maybe to less infos...
This I can hopefully mend...
> > Am I asking the wrong list? Is there some error so obvious nobody even
> > t
Am 2008-01-08 22:53:10, schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter:
> Almost a week gone by and nobody picked this mail up.
:-) Maybe to less infos...
> Am I asking the wrong list? Is there some error so obvious nobody even thinks
> its worth to answer?
First of all: Since you have:
set folder=imap://m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday, January 8 at 10:53 PM, quoth Patrick Ben Koetter:
>Almost a week gone by and nobody picked this mail up.
>
>Am I asking the wrong list? Is there some error so obvious nobody even thinks
>its worth to answer?
Worse: nobody knows the answe
Almost a week gone by and nobody picked this mail up.
Am I asking the wrong list? Is there some error so obvious nobody even thinks
its worth to answer?
Thanks,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Patrick Ben Koetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I am having problems getting mutt [Mutt 1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11)
I am having problems getting mutt [Mutt 1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) with
patches from Ubuntu] to check all subscribed subfolders of my IMAP INBOX.
The problem might stem from my configuration. All I could find reading various
documentation was this:
set imap_user='username'
set imap_pass='passwo
* Gerhard Hring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020312 02:11]:
> Le 11/03/02 à 17:15, Gerhard Häring écrivit:
> > Le 11/03/02 à 15:54, Simon White écrivit:
> > > [mutt & imap is slow]
> > Reading the ~5000 emails from my mutt-user folder takes approx. 18
> > seconds. That's really slow, IMNSHO.
> Apparently,
Le 11/03/02 à 17:15, Gerhard Häring écrivit:
> Le 11/03/02 à 15:54, Simon White écrivit:
> > [mutt & imap is slow]
>
> [...]
> Reading the ~5000 emails from my mutt-user folder takes approx. 18
> seconds. That's really slow, IMNSHO. I think the only thing that would
> really help would be to inst
Le 11/03/02 à 15:54, Simon White écrivit:
> Hello
>
> I am having some performance problems with IMAP via MUTT, it seems hungrier
> for I/O than PINE was. However, I like mutt enough to put up with some
> slowness, but over a 10mbps network direct to the mailserver I'd expect it to
> be a bit bet
Hello
I am having some performance problems with IMAP via MUTT, it seems hungrier
for I/O than PINE was. However, I like mutt enough to put up with some
slowness, but over a 10mbps network direct to the mailserver I'd expect it to
be a bit better.
Maybe a better IMAP server would help. I can fin
37 matches
Mail list logo
