Re: Binding to CTRL + arrowkeys
On 2007-10-14, Felix 'buebo' Kakrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > Am 13.10.07 19:12 schrieb Gary Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > To see what mutt receives when you type a key or key combination, > > execute this in mutt: > > > >:exec what-key > > This does only seem to work when I set $LANG to something that is not UTF-8, > per default $LANG is de_DE.UTF-8 on my System (Ubuntu 7.10) and I'd rather > not change it. > > Is there any other way of obtaining the key codes? I tried 'showkey' as > well but that refused to work under x.org. One way is to use a text editor such as vim. Using vim, enter insert mode and type Ctrl-V followed by the key whose key code you wish to find. For example, on the following lines I typed : ^[OA ^[[A The first character in each line was Escape, displayed in vim as ^[, so I replaces the actual Escape character with a carat (^) followed by a left bracket ([) so that you could see it. What that means is that the PuTTY terminal I am currently using sends OA for the up arrow and [A for Ctrl-up-arrow. So if the terminal you are using does the same thing, you could create macros like this: macro pager \eOA do-up-command macro pager \e[A do-ctrl-up-command I think that if mutt already recognizes \eOA as you must use and not \eOA, but I'm not sure about that. > What I don't get is that I can bind comands to the arrow-keys (like > for for example) and control works in other combinations (like > ^F for forgetting the pgp passphrase), so what is different about control + > arrow-key? ^F is a standard representation for, or a standard mechanism for generating, an ASCII character whose value is 0x06. There is also a standard interface for handling keys that are not part of the ASCII character set. This is described in the terminfo man page. Terminals often send these keys as the Escape character followed by a sequence of other characters, as in the up-arrow example above. Terminal libraries such as ncurses use the terminfo database to translate between the escape sequences sent by a particular terminal for a particular key and the terminfo code for that key. There is a terminfo definition for the up-arrow but not for ctrl-up-arrow. Not all terminals send unique escape sequences for all keys. Your terminal may not send a unique sequences for up-arrow and ctrl-up-arrow. I don't know much about the differences between terminals and the escape codes they use. Regards, Gary
Re: Procmail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [10-14-07 12:43]: > Am 2007-10-09 21:06:32, schrieb Patrick Shanahan: > > Do you have something afterwards altering $MAILDIR, > > AND > > your procmail *path* variables should be quoted: > > I am usung procmail since ober 8 years and have never quoted it. Which certainly doesn't mean or imply that *you* are correct. This advise *is* offered by knowledgable individuals on the procmail list. - -- Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USAHOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535@ http://counter.li.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn4472 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHEk2qClSjbQz1U5oRAlIDAJ9Q0jnByUja1eM7mCH+O8xkqKIC4wCeMfSC apY9X5Wo+qFWnJSYVwsp858= =nDCA -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Procmail Nesting
Am 2007-10-10 15:29:08, schrieb Rem P Roberti: > Is it possible to use curly braces to nest conditions? For > example, there are two addresses that can be used for the FreeBSD > mailing list to which I subscribe, and I would like to incorporate them both > into the same > recipe. > > Rem > - END OF REPLIED MESSAGE - YES, but such question should be ask on <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> the main procmail-list. Thanks, Greetings and nice Day Michelle Konzack Systemadministrator Tamay Dogan Network Debian GNU/Linux Consultant -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant # Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi 0033/6/6192519367100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: Procmail
Am 2007-10-09 21:19:54, schrieb Kyle Wheeler: > On Tuesday, October 9 at 04:37 PM, quoth Rem P Roberti: > > My thanks again to both of you. Creating my .procmailrc recipe in > > the manner suggested by Joseph did the trick. What I don't > > understand is that since the variable MAILDIR=$HOME/Mail exists at > > the beginning of .procmailrc why is it necessary to state the full > > path to the target mailbox in the recipe? > > It's not; it's just often helpful to be extra explicit when trying to > figure out why things don't work. But not realy since in the logfile the patch will be cuted to ~70 chars... The original Log was: 8<-- Subject: Re: Procmail Folder: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/new/1192149195.19419_0.tp570.pr4006 8<-- Using a full path would be: 8<-- Subject: Re: Procmail Folder: /home/michelle.konzack/Maildir/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/4006 8<-- but since some of my Maildir are longer, your logfile will be worthless for analyzing. Thanks, Greetings and nice Day Michelle Konzack Systemadministrator Tamay Dogan Network Debian GNU/Linux Consultant -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant # Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi 0033/6/6192519367100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: Procmail
Hello Patrick, Am 2007-10-09 21:06:32, schrieb Patrick Shanahan: > Do you have something afterwards altering $MAILDIR, > AND > your procmail *path* variables should be quoted: I am usung procmail since ober 8 years and have never quoted it. > SHELL="/bin/bash" > SPOOL="/var/spool/mail" > MAILDIR="$HOME/Mail" > DEFAULT="$SPOOL/pat" > PMDIR="$HOME/.procmail" > LOGFILE="$PMDIR/log" Thanks, Greetings and nice Day Michelle Konzack Systemadministrator Tamay Dogan Network Debian GNU/Linux Consultant -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant # Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi 0033/6/6192519367100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: Procmail
Am 2007-10-09 16:06:31, schrieb Rem P Roberti: > > Back at it (Kyle, are you out there?). I've been trying to set up > individual mailboxes for folks I receive mail from frequently. I > create the mailbox in .muttrc (mailboxes $HOME/Mail/user), and then a recipe > like this in > .procmailrc: > > :0: > * ^From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > user > > But the mail isn't getting filtered to the named mailboxes. Procmail is > making me feel a little stupid. Try: :0: * ^From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] user Thanks, Greetings and nice Day Michelle Konzack Systemadministrator Tamay Dogan Network Debian GNU/Linux Consultant -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant # Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi 0033/6/6192519367100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: How to send a return receipt
On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 12:40:08AM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2007 at 10:10:45PM +0100, Chris G wrote: > > But you're asking for "proof that it reached us as the recipient" for > > multiple recipients apparently, with a *single* acknowledgement. > > That's just not possible in any sort of system. > > No. You get me wrong, repeatedly. I'm asking for a "proof" that a message has > reached a single role. It does not matter if more then one person can actually > be the role. > OK, so how/what/where does this "single role" exist? As I understand it it *has* to exist somewhere before the mail reaches the individuals each of whom actually receives the mail. Thus you need to receive this acknowledgement from somewhere that deals with the mail *before* it ever gets delivered to the individuals' MUAs, so the requirement cannot be fulfilled by mutt. -- Chris Green
Re: How to send a return receipt
On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 12:40:08AM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: No. You get me wrong, repeatedly. I'm asking for a "proof" that a message has reached a single role. It does not matter if more then one person can actually be the role. Hm, do you mean, it is enough for you if the last server sends a Delivery Status Notification (DSN), that it delivered the mail to one or more mailboxes? Are DSNs not part of a RFC? Or do you want a notification if the recipient (and in case of a role every recipient) opens the mail? While I accept the first one, the last one should be out of question. Even in your snail mail example you will only get a notification that the letter was delivered, not that the recipient has read it. For DSN mutt offers you the variables dsn_notify and dsn_return. But if I understand the manual correctly, it all depends on the MTA to honor them. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan SeitzE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Binding to CTRL + arrowkeys
Hello, Am 13.10.07 19:12 schrieb Gary Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > To see what mutt receives when you type a key or key combination, > execute this in mutt: > >:exec what-key This does only seem to work when I set $LANG to something that is not UTF-8, per default $LANG is de_DE.UTF-8 on my System (Ubuntu 7.10) and I'd rather not change it. Is there any other way of obtaining the key codes? I tried 'showkey' as well but that refused to work under x.org. What I don't get is that I can bind comands to the arrow-keys (like for for example) and control works in other combinations (like ^F for forgetting the pgp passphrase), so what is different about control + arrow-key? Felix -- "Datenautobahnen sind Ländersache" -- Dr. Helmut Kohl pgppVf6BDacRu.pgp Description: PGP signature
