Bill wrote:
David Levine levin...@acm.org writes:
I've had this in my .mh_profile almost since I started using nmh:
postproc: /usr/libexec/nmh/spost
Wow, how did you ever know to use it?
That's in the FAQ. Should be removed, I think.
There seemed to be some legitimate
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:02:15 EST, Ken Hornstein writes:
yes! please either keep it, or improve post by giving it a switch that
allows it to submit mail to an mta/msp program directly.
E ... you know about the sendmail mts, right?
i do indeed - but post always talks smtp, even with mts:
I've had this in my .mh_profile almost since I started using nmh:
postproc: /usr/libexec/nmh/spost
Wow, how did you ever know to use it?
That's in the FAQ. Should be removed, I think.
David
___
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
On the other hand, I personally don't think any of this is important
enough to spend a lot of cycles on, this isn't an area where nmh is
really deficient.
Well, I respectfully don't agree. You admit yourself that your
setup is unusual; you control all of the components (including DNS)
yourself.
Date:Tue, 07 Feb 2012 09:36:10 -0500
From:Ken Hornstein k...@pobox.com
Message-ID: 201202071436.q17eaeal030...@hedwig.cmf.nrl.navy.mil
| - Code simplification. That's what removing support for turning off
| draft_from is about
For what it is worth, in case it
Robert Elz writes:
If all you want from mh is show/next/comp/repl/rmm you might just as
well use thunderbird, or sylpheed, or even outlook express - they all
provide methods to read, delete, reply, ... to e-mail, and usually with
a user interface that is easier to master.
Don't be so sure of
On 2012-02-07, at 3:00 AM, Oliver Kiddle wrote:
I'd prefer to just see the email. mhshow could have a -pedantic or -lint
option.
Or you could use cat(1).
___
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
I don't understand that, I've used multiple identities, without any
particular difficulties, for a long time now ( 20 years), and MH (and
later nmh) just works as it is. That is, to say, in this area I see
no need for any changes, and consequently no need for any code to be
developed.
Well,
On 2/7/2012 2:36 PM, Ken Hornstein wrote:
... (nb:
this is not to denigrate IMAP. For people whose needs it serves, it is
just fine, it is just that those needs, and MH's requirements, aren't
compatible.)
Well, people have made what I consider reasonable arguments in terms of
use cases for
Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
On 2012-02-07, at 3:00 AM, Oliver Kiddle wrote:
I'd prefer to just see the email. mhshow could have a -pedantic or -lint
option.
Or you could use cat(1).
Well that's what I do do.
It's great that MH makes that easy and there are various situations in
which I will
On 2012-02-07, at 7:37 AM, Oliver Kiddle wrote:
But do you really think that
should be the only resort when badly formed mail arrives? I'd prefer to
see what was intended by the sender.
Yes, I do :-( QP and Base64 (and MIME in general) have been around for nearly
two decades now. If the
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
But do you really think that
should be the only resort when badly formed mail arrives? I'd prefer to
see what was intended by the sender.
Yes, I do :-( QP and Base64 (and MIME in general) have been around for
nearly two decades
I would love to be able to prevail upon them to fix this or to dump all
such nonconforming mail in the bin. That said, when I get mail from
ConfMaster, it tends to be mail that I need to read, so I appreciate it
when nmh can take a guess and perhaps show me some not-too-garbled text.
(In
On 2012-02-07, at 9:29 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
being liberal about what you except
Oh good lord, did I really write that?!? :-)
___
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Thus spake Lyndon Nerenberg:
all
such nonconforming mail in the bin. That said, when I get mail from
ConfMaster, it tends to be mail that I need to read, so I appreciate =
it
when nmh can take a guess and perhaps show me some not-too-garbled =
text.
(In this particular case, 'show'
On 2012-02-07, at 10:13 AM, Joel Uckelman wrote:
What you're describing here is far beyond what I was intending; I only
want a seamless way to apply my eyeballs to these broken messages.
I don't think it gets any more seamless than cat. I would have show (and
anything else) print the full
ken wrote:
Greetings all,
I've been (slowly) working on sorting out the whole From: mess that
was discussed earlier, and of course like many things in nmh there are
a ton of assumptions that makes this a lot harder than it needs to be.
But I digress ...
I came across the code in
Thus spake Ken Hornstein:
And while we're talking about post I always forget about it, but there's
also spost. It opens a pipe to sendmail -t and uses that to submit email.
It's not documented and there's a lot of duplicated code there. I propose
to just get rid of it (because,
In the message dated: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:59:17 EST,
The pithy ruminations from Ken Hornstein on
[Nmh-workers] masquerade settings spost were:
= Greetings all,
=
= I've been (slowly) working on sorting out the whole From: mess that
= was discussed earlier, and of course like many things in nmh
i didn't know about user_extension until just now. it's a pretty modern
feature, as these things go, though it would probably be more generally
useful if it allowed for substituting the entire username, rather than
just appending to it. in any case, i suspect it's a new enough feature
(the man
Thus spake Ken Hornstein:
And while we're talking about post I always forget about it, but
there's also spost. It opens a pipe to sendmail -t and uses that to
submit email. It's not documented and there's a lot of duplicated
code there. I propose to just get rid of it (because,
I've had this in my .mh_profile almost since I started using nmh:
postproc: /usr/libexec/nmh/spost
Wow, how did you ever know to use it?
I must have had some reason for it once, but I can't recall what that
would have been now. If I don't have this, I presume post will be used
instead. It's
yes! please either keep it, or improve post by giving it a switch that
allows it to submit mail to an mta/msp program directly.
E ... you know about the sendmail mts, right?
--Ken
___
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:17:42 EST, Ken Hornstein writes:
yes! please either keep it, or improve post by giving it a switch that
allows it to submit mail to an mta/msp program directly.
E ... you know about the sendmail mts, right?
i do indeed - but post always talks smtp, even with mts:
On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 12:13:36 +1000
Alexander Zangerl wrote -
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:59:17 EST, Ken Hornstein writes:
And while we're talking about post I always forget about it, but there'
s
also spost. It opens a pipe to sendmail -t and uses that to submit email.
It's not documented
yes! please either keep it, or improve post by giving it a switch that
allows it to submit mail to an mta/msp program directly.
E ... you know about the sendmail mts, right?
i do indeed - but post always talks smtp, even with mts: sendmail.
i need something that submits to a program on
Date:Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:59:17 -0500
From:Ken Hornstein k...@pobox.com
Message-ID: 201202062359.q16nxipo024...@hedwig.cmf.nrl.navy.mil
| I think that
| we should simply remove the flag and always use the From:
| header in the draft as the
Really? How do you propose making that work? Look at the From: header
of this message, which should be the same as the From: header in the
draft that I am currently typing, and try to figure out how to make that
fit the rules for the envelope from.
I'm not changing the way nmh works, Robert.
Thus spake Ken Hornstein:
I've had this in my .mh_profile almost since I started using nmh:
postproc: /usr/libexec/nmh/spost
Wow, how did you ever know to use it?
Most likely, I picked that up from someone else at Iowa State. There
were a huge number of nmh users on Project Vincent when
On 2012-02-06, at 7:51 PM, Joel Uckelman wrote:
I wonder how this will play with the /usr/bin/sendmail provided by
postfix. According to its man page, -om is ignored, while -oem and -ov
aren't listed at all.
-om (include sender in alias expansion) is always on in postfix.
-oem (mail back
Date:Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:41:14 -0500
From:Ken Hornstein k...@pobox.com
Message-ID: 201202070341.q173fepw025...@hedwig.cmf.nrl.navy.mil
| For the record ... it looks like what nmh does is that it picks the
| last one and uses that as the envelope from.
That's
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:41:14 EST, Ken Hornstein said:
I'm not changing the way nmh works, Robert. It already does that today,
as shipped, by default. All I'm proposing is that we remove the code that
lets you turn off that behavior ... because it's a gigantic mess and
I can't see the point
On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 10:14:53 +0700, Robert Elz said:
Really? How do you propose making that work? Look at the From: header
of this message
One wonders how many MUAs out there choke at that. Does Outlook/Exchange
manage to cope with that?
Please read the mail standards before proposing
Which brings up a question - is it sane to try to support
per-destination customization? I can probably do the things I'd want
in replcomps and friends, *if* there was a way to say emit this header
for matches in 'to' for this pattern, but emit this other header for
non-match recipients.
You
ken wrote:
pgf wrote:
i didn't know about user_extension until just now. it's a pretty modern
feature, as these things go, though it would probably be more generally
useful if it allowed for substituting the entire username, rather than
just appending to it. in any case, i suspect it's a
i wrote:
ken wrote:
pgf wrote:
i didn't know about user_extension until just now. it's a pretty modern
feature, as these things go, though it would probably be more generally
useful if it allowed for substituting the entire username, rather than
just appending to it. in any
I didn't get to see what was inserted in the message I sent before, I
didn't cc it to myself, and the list replaces the Sender with one of
its own choosing (and without altering the Message-ID, which is broken
behaviour, not that that is relevant to nmh).
Well, the off-list copy you sent me had:
sorry. i was rambling. i'm only saying that it should be dropped,
because, a) it's a pretty new feature, so there are probably people
actively using it, and b) it's quite a useful feature -- on the fly
modification (albeit limited) of the From: address, in a way that caters
to the
Please don't reduce nmh to being just another mailer in the as long as
it works with outlook it is OK camp that so many others have fallen
into. It must continue to be semantically, as well as syntactically,
correct. Even if the code to do that is not easy to make work, or
understand.
Well,
39 matches
Mail list logo
