-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Will Yardley hath spake thusly: > the procmail recipe seems to work fine
Except it doesn't. if the mail has an attachment. It no work good. :) I have a lot of Pine-using friends, and this is what happens when they send me an encrypted mail with attachments (which happens often enough to be bothersome). And, while Esc-P makes this situation a bit better to deal with, I get a LOT of encrypted and/or signed mail. I receive prolly 400-600 messages a day, of which I would estimate about 20% to 30% are signed or encrypted. Having to hit esc-P for every single one of them (we're talking between 80-180 messages a day, in the extremes) gets extremely tedious. Forgetting to do so (which happens often) when I'm replying to, say, an old-style signed message means I then also have to weed out a lot of crap from the reply that I (IMO) shouldn't need to. Mutt should do this for me, by automatically recognizing that the message is a PGP-somethingorother message. I would make the argument that computers are very good at doing repetetive, tedious tasks. People aren't, and typically don't enjoy them. We use computers to make our lives easier, to remove as many of the repetetive, tedious tasks as possible. This is a perfect example of when that should be done, IMO. While yes, it is possible to make mutt do this by implementing a macro, it seems to me that a sufficiently significant amount of time and bandwidth has been wasted by people on this list REPEATEDLY explaining how to do this, and REPEATEDLY arguing about whether mutt really ought to do this automatically (or more accurately, to provide the option to do so), that it seems the answer to the latter question should be obvious... > and if you hit <esc>e to edit the raw message, you'll see that the > message hasn't been modified, and it's still in 'traditional' form; > it just has had the appropriate mime type added to the headers up > top. That's still modifying the message... the headers are part of the message. I'm against MTA/MDA munging of mail in all its forms, when not absolutely necessary (i.e. when passing messages between incompatible mail systems). The MDA shouldn't NEED to know about PGP or any other user application; its job is to DELIVER mail, not muck with it. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - --------------------------------------------- I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8Uf3JdjdlQoHP510RAorIAKCe2lp/vPSum3TPuBqW8qO8hRtVDACfSXuy h9tOfUa2BfSn/Qf6K0v15Nc= =pI+e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
