On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 10:32:35AM -0500, Stephen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 04:59:52AM -0500 or thereabouts, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 09:53:33AM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
> 
> > > Could you not just use emacs as the editor for mutt?
> 
> > I am in the process of trying to get procmail to filter all posts
> > through the gnus function so that when I use mutt, the post is
> > de-uglified. I do not use emacs. and I do not want to edits posts in it,
> > but wish emacs to process the mail.
> 
> Hi Kevin:
> 
> I would be interested in this, if you manage to sort it out. :)
Hi Stephen,
This was an interesting diversion! I found #emacs on freenode and asked
the supplicants of RMS for a magic invocation and lo and behold I was
issued an answer: (this is it plus the procmail bits)
------.procmailrc snippet---
:0fh:
|emacs --batch --eval "(with-current-buffer 
                       (get-buffer-create \"*Article*\") 
                       (condition-case nil 
                       (while t 
                       (insert 
                       (read-string \"\") \"\\n\")) 
                       (error)) 
                       (gnus-outlook-deuglify-article t) 
                       (princ (buffer-string)))"
-----------------------------
But so far, it has not changed an emails, at least as far as I can tell.
If anyone knows why or has a better function, let me know.
-Kev
-- 
|  .''`.  == Debian GNU/Linux == |       my web site:           |
| : :' :      The  Universal     |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/|
| `. `'      Operating System    | go to counter.li.org and     |
|   `-    http://www.debian.org/ |    be counted! #238656       |
|   my keysever: subkeys.pgp.net |     my NPO: cfsg.org         |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature



Reply via email to