Re: Some small problems...
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 10:09:29PM +0200, Jesper Holmberg wrote: * Michael Tatge [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000807 20:39]: GianPiero Puccioni muttered: I am using mutt 1.2.4i on a RedHat 6.1 using KDE and Konsole as a terminal. I installed it with the RPM found in mutt.linuxatwork.at For some reason the end key doesn't work, all the other keys, home, PageUp PageDown, etc work but end doesn't. Sorry can't help you with that. I use rh 6.2 and everything works fine. Well this is exactly what I've experienced as well. On RedHat 6.1, end didn't work. After an upgrade to RedHat 6.2, the problem disappeared. Now, on Mandrake 7.1, as my previous question indicated, neither home, end, ALT nor F1-F12 work. http://dickey.his.com/xterm/xterm.faq.html "How do I set up function keys?" -- Thomas E. Dickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dickey.his.com ftp://dickey.his.com
Missing References (was: Some small problems...)
I'm curious: Why has the mail by Jesper no References:- or In-Reply-To:-Header? Is it possible to disable this in mutt? Best regards Martin -- Martin Schröder, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ArtCom GmbH, Grazer Straße 8, D-28359 Bremen Voice +49 421 20419-44 / Fax +49 421 20419-10 PGP signature
Re: Some small problems...
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 12:33:00AM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote: The result is a mess. I've yet to see a single Linux distribution which doesn't need terminfo hacking for all keys to be recognised correctly in all terminal emulators (things usually work fine in the Linux console... ...usually (except that there are some variations on the line-drawing character set which cause confusion). -- Thomas E. Dickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dickey.his.com ftp://dickey.his.com
Writing Return-Path
Hi, This may be a sendmail problem but I'll start off asking the question here. I am trying to setup three mailboxes as follows: Real users:A and B Pseudo user: P Users A and B each read their own private inboxes. They also read P's inbox. A combination of .procmailrc and .muttrc acheive all this using mbox-hook and folder-hook. The psuedo user will actually be a generic customer interface account, for example sales@ or support@. Everything seems to be working fine for incomming mail. Using the following folder-hook support my_hdr From: Support [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am able to change the From field. The Problem. I don't want the recipient to ever know the actual Linux account name which actually handled the mail but the recipient gets this: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there any way to alter this field in .muttrc? Should I be trying to do all this in a completly different way? Thanks Rob Watkin PS I have only been using Mutt for two weeks but I am now a total convert. :)
Re: PGP6 The Bat
Hello Mutt Users! On pon 07 sie 2000 17:33:40 GMT Aaron Schrab wrote: I suspect that that's what's happening in this case, since the example message (which had Content-Type: text/plain) got modified by my procmail rules and mutt successfully checked the signature. Yes, that's it and that's why I wrote about this :) But the rule that prevents this from happening with multipart messages is necessary, because the modification that is done by that rule will prevent mutt (or any MUA) from dealing with multipart messages. So, it's a tradeoff: Yes, you're absolutely right. However there must be a solution. Tell me how the attachment/MIME mechanizm work. I mean I know generally but maybe there is a RFC or something describing the thing? Right now I am analyzying Mutt's Content-Type output. I think there is need for a script (maybe Perl) that will reformat mails which give the trouble. One more thing: do lines like -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- or -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- need to be removed? I mean GPG will recognize and skip them? -- Tomasz Olszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP signature
Re: Re[2]: PGP6 The Bat
msg.pgp
Re: PGP6 The Bat
msg.pgp
Re: PGP6 The Bat
msg.pgp
Re: Writing Return-Path
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 06:11:05PM +1000, Rob Watkin wrote: I don't want the recipient to ever know the actual Linux account name which actually handled the mail but the recipient gets this: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there any way to alter this field in .muttrc? Should I be trying to do all this in a completly different way? IIRC this header field is added by an MTA and contains the envelope from address. If you want it to match From header, set Mutt's variable $evelope_from. This variable appeared in 1.1.x development series, and if you don't want to upgrade to 1.2, you'll have to manually set $sendmail to add `-f address' to its default value. HTH, Marius Gedminas -- If something has not yet gone wrong then it would ultimately have been beneficial for it to go wrong.
Re: Missing References (was: Some small problems...)
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 10:11:06AM +0200, Martin Schröder wrote: I'm curious: Why has the mail by Jesper no References:- or In-Reply-To:-Header? Is it possible to disable this in mutt? AFAIK the only way to do it is to have $edit_headers set and then remove them in your editor. (That's what I do when I want to start a new thread). Marius Gedminas -- Those parts of the system that you can hit with a hammer (not advised) are called hardware; those program instructions that you can only curse at are called software. -- Levitating Trains and Kamikaze Genes: Technological Literacy for the 1990's.
Re: PGP6 The Bat
On 2000-08-07 16:49:55 -0500, Gary wrote: In reading your email in The Bat!, your signature is seen as an attachment (called "message.att) and not in-line with the message, which means one has to open it up separately. Is this normal with Mutt? How would you set your GPG sig in-line? Please point The Bat!'s authors to RFC 2015. A successor's revised Internet-Draft should go into the ID repositories these days. -- Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
not quoting signature on replies
Hello All, Is it somehow possible not to quote signatures on replies? TIA. -- Best regards, Leonid Mamtchenkov System administrator J.F.Services Ltd. (Limassol, Cyprus) E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re[2]: PGP6 The Bat
Gary -- ...and then Gary said... % On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 06:39:17AM -0400 or thereabouts, David T-G wrote: % % Content-Type: application/pgp; x-action=sign; format=text % Content-Disposition: inline; filename="msg.pgp" ... % Sure enough, your unmodified message is an old-style PGP message; my % magic procmail recipe (from PGP-Notes.txt) made it look right and off we % went. Let us know how my reply looks to you... % % Daivd, % Yes, it came through loud and clear in clear sign with the sigs in the % text as the old style, not PGP/MIME. Figured as much. % % How did you do that? I really need to have Mutt use the old style at In my gpg.rc file, I have set pgp_sign_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor --detach-sign --textmode %?a?-u %a? %f" set pgp_clearsign_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor --textmode --clearsign %?a?-u %a? %f" and I pick between them by setting pgp_create_traditional to no and yes, respectively. Oh, phooey. In fact, I now realize that I forgot to turn it back off after my test message to you, so a couple of messages have gone out the old way. Ugh. % times without PGP/MIME. I am on a PGP / GPG egroup and nobody (from the % Windows side) can read my signed attachments unless they are in-line and Wankers! % the old style. Can you tell me how to do that in Mutt? For a price ;-) I'd love to come up with a hook, perhaps based on X-Label: contents (set by procmail when it recognizes these mailers), that would allow me to have mutt automatically set pgp_create_traditional when replying to mail from users of Outhouse, Eudora, and now TheBat! so that they can see the sig -- and perhaps even create an extra header flaming them for having non-compliant mailers. Wanna work it out? :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bigfoot.com/~davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! The "new millennium" starts at the beginning of 2001. There was no year 0. Note: If bigfoot.com gives you fits, try sector13.org in its place. *sigh* PGP signature
Re: not quoting signature on replies
Leonid -- ...and then Leonid Mamtchenkov said... % Hello All, % % Is it somehow possible not to quote signatures on replies? I don't think it's possible to tell mutt to leave it off, but it's pretty easy to work up an entry macro for your editor that first prunes it off. If that doesn't work, set your editor to a script that first does the pruning and then fires up the real thing. % TIA. HTH HAND % % -- % Best regards, % Leonid Mamtchenkov % System administrator % J.F.Services Ltd. (Limassol, Cyprus) % E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bigfoot.com/~davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! The "new millennium" starts at the beginning of 2001. There was no year 0. Note: If bigfoot.com gives you fits, try sector13.org in its place. *sigh* PGP signature
Re: Changing my_hdr back to default
Ben Beuchler muttered: I've setup up a macro for sending mail as another "persona" that looks something like this: macro index M ":my_hdr From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]enterm" What I'm trying to work out is a way to automatically switch back to using my normal information for any future emails. write special rcfiles for each profile. and use macros so switch between them. macro index ^F2 ":source ~/.mutt/muttrc" "reset to default" marco index ^F3 ":source ~/.mutt/profile1" "become person 1" marco index ^F4 ":source ~/.mutt/profile2" "become person 2" where ~/.mutt/profile# contains all configurguration stuff. i.e my_hdr, signature, attribution, whatever HTH, Michael -- The program isn't debugged until the last user is dead. PGP-fingerprint: DECA E9D2 EBDD 0FE0 0A65 40FA 5967 ACA1 0B57 7C13
Re: not quoting signature on replies
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 09:10:14AM -0400, David T-G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...and then Leonid Mamtchenkov said... % Is it somehow possible not to quote signatures on replies? I don't think it's possible to tell mutt to leave it off, but it's pretty easy to work up an entry macro for your editor that first prunes it off. If that doesn't work, set your editor to a script that first does the pruning and then fires up the real thing. Indeed, the typical reply is that this is functionality that belongs in the editor, not in mutt. -- Bob Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] - "Beware "We should", extend a hand to "How do I"..." -- Alan Cox on Slashdot.org
Indent_string
Can anybody tell me why this doesn't work: set indent_string=`for x in %n; do echo $x | cut -c 1; done;` Normally (when I run it manually from the shell) it works fine (of course when I replace %n with some words). -- Tomasz Olszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Indent_string
Caster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Tue, 08 Aug 2000: Can anybody tell me why this doesn't work: set indent_string=`for x in %n; do echo $x | cut -c 1; done;` Normally (when I run it manually from the shell) it works fine (of course when I replace %n with some words). I don't know for sure, but I would venture to guess that $indent_string is only evaluated once at .muttrc load time, not for each message individually. So %n would likely be empty, then... Regards, Mikko -- // Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/ // The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator / // Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy scifi, the Corrs / This signature is not here. (There are no hidden messages on this line.)
Re: Indent_string
Hello Mutt Users! On wto 08 sie 2000 17:43:40 GMT Caster wrote: Can anybody tell me why this doesn't work: set indent_string=`for x in %n; do echo $x | cut -c 1; done;` Of course I forgot about send-hook so it just couldn't work... Eh... -- lamest Tomasz Olszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Missing References
On 2000-08-08 13:02:59 +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote: On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 10:11:06AM +0200, Martin Schröder wrote: I'm curious: Why has the mail by Jesper no References:- or In-Reply-To:-Header? Is it possible to disable this in mutt? AFAIK the only way to do it is to have $edit_headers set and then remove them in your editor. (That's what I do when I want to start a new thread). Ah. I asked someone who did this here and he replied that he had removed the header lines because they looked superflous. Perhaps a warning in the manual/guide is advised. Best regards Martin -- Martin Schröder, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ArtCom GmbH, Grazer Straße 8, D-28359 Bremen Voice +49 421 20419-44 / Fax +49 421 20419-10 PGP signature
Re: Missing References (was: Some small problems...)
* Martin Schröder [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000808 12:48]: I'm curious: Why has the mail by Jesper no References:- or In-Reply-To:-Header? Is it possible to disable this in mutt? Well, this comes as a surprise to me as well. I have not knowingly (nor manually) erased these headers. In fact, I've been trying to do the opposite, sort of. I thought this: subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... set followup_to set honor_followup_to=yes would produce the In-Reply-To: - header. The References: - header I don't recognize. Could you please help me identify what I have done wrong. Jesper
Re: PGP6 The Bat
On 2000-08-08 01:12:42 +0200, Caster wrote: Wel, here it goes. I don't think it can be useful, because now I know why the problems occurs (because his message contains an atachment) and procmail recipe doesn't call formail to rewrite the headers. Yep... When I originally saw your note about multipart/mixed with PGP nessages, I speculated about a broken attempt to implement PGP/MIME, but this is just a MUA being creative and attaching the public key to messages. -- Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PGP6 The Bat
At 12:12 +0200 08 Aug 2000, Caster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On pon 07 sie 2000 17:33:40 GMT Aaron Schrab wrote: But the rule that prevents this from happening with multipart messages is necessary, because the modification that is done by that rule will prevent mutt (or any MUA) from dealing with multipart messages. So, it's a tradeoff: Yes, you're absolutely right. However there must be a solution. Tell me how the attachment/MIME mechanizm work. I mean I know generally but maybe there is a RFC or something describing the thing? Right now I am analyzying Mutt's Content-Type output. I think there is need for a script (maybe Perl) that will reformat mails which give the trouble. One more thing: do lines like -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- or -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- need to be removed? I mean GPG will recognize and skip them? No, those lines shouldn't be removed. Really, all that needs to be done is to rewrite the Content-Type: line of the relevant part to something like that inserted by the procmail rules. It probably wouldn't be all that difficult to do this with a perl script using the MIME:: modules. One additional complication is that in this case the signed part also specifies a character set. Mutt won't currently honor a charset parameter for application/pgp parts, so some characters may appear incorrectly. -- Aaron Schrab [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.execpc.com/~aarons/ When we aren't plundering and wreaking havoc, we speak out on the importance of safe boating. -- Spider Pirate Captain (The Drywall and Oswald Show #2) PGP signature
Re: GPG and mail
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 11:16:25PM +, Subba Rao wrote: I have been reading through the GPG manual and it explains the primary use of the GPG for signing files/documents. How can I use GPG to sign email or encrypt email? Make sure that you have gpg installed when you run Mutt's `configure'. After you have installed, read doc/PGP-Notes.txt, specifically the first section which tells you what you need to add to your ~/.muttrc. me PGP signature
