Please drop this [was: NNTP reader?]
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 09:26:32AM +0300, Alexander Gattin wrote: > On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 12:49:20PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:46:43PM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: > > > Linux is a kernel, not an operating system. > > > > I suggest you not go there (like, ever). This > > statement is at least arguably false on several > > levels, > > Well, Linux is just a kernel, there's nothing to > argue about. Mutt is MUA, not a framework for > MUA/NNTPUA/whatever-you-like. Hope you get it. This is off-topic, and it's a tired old argument that's been debated more than enough elsewhere, in more appropriate forums. The positions of both sides of the debate are well known, and no one here is adding anything to it. Can all of you please drop it now. If you *must* have this argument, take it off list. This is the *mutt-users* mailing list, not a debating list. Until now, it's been a remarkably polite, friendly, and helpful list. As a long-time mutt user, who's found this list extremely helpful on more than one occasion, I'd appreciate it if you didn't spoil it. Thanks, Toby -- Dr T. S. Cubitt Mathematics and Quantum Information group Department of Mathematics Complutense University Madrid, Spain email: ts...@cantab.net web: www.dr-qubit.org
Re: NNTP reader?
Hello, On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 12:49:20PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:46:43PM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: > > Linux is a kernel, not an operating system. > > I suggest you not go there (like, ever). This > statement is at least arguably false on several > levels, Well, Linux is just a kernel, there's nothing to argue about. Mutt is MUA, not a framework for MUA/NNTPUA/whatever-you-like. Hope you get it. On the other hand, both are free as in free speech, so you are obviously free to tailor them to your liking, producing Linux-as-a-system, or mutt-as-a-framework. Please don't forget then, that mutt and Linux Developers are also free to either accept or reject you patches and this will serve as a indicator of Linux's as-a-systemness or mutt's as-a-frameworkiness in public opinion. -- With best regards, xrgtn
Re: NNTP reader?
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:12:22PM -0300, Aaron Toponce wrote: > I love it when something someone doesn't agree with gets tagged as > "trolling". Meh. I love it when something that's trolling gets tagged as trolling. Seriously... you posted an e-mail in a public forum whose sole content was to proclaim that a long-time and respected member of the community misused the term "operating system" in his post. So, let's see... * Off topic, for both the thread and this list? Check. * Contains language which is incendiary or expected to produce an emotional response? (Not sure how butting in to tell someone flatly that their usage of terminology is wrong could not be viewed that way.) Check. * Argumentative without making a useful point? Check. * Contributes zero to the OP's (or any) discussion? Check. * text book definition of trolling? Check. So there you have it. Your post was trolling, by definition. I tried to be nicer about pointing out that you were trolling, but you weren't having any of that... I suspect most people would agree that your suggestion that the way David used "Linux" and "Operating System" together was inappropriate is rather silly, but sadly that can not be proven. > Tell you what, you install just the Linux kernel, and nothing more, on your > laptop, and tell me just how usable your "operating system" is. Trolling in the very e-mail where one attempts to suggest that one is not trolling: Priceless™ Have a lovely day. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. pgpR5Ro4QGGSl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NNTP reader?
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 03:31:37PM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: > Legitimate authorities categorized Pluto a planet, even though many in the > scientific community would argue otherwise. Of course, "legitimate > authorities" are never wrong, are they? That is exactly my point, thanks for making it. Or perhaps your own authority on this topic is somehow irrefutable and inscrutable? Oh, right, you have wikipedia on your side, which everyone knows is, in fact, irrefutable and inscrutable. I forgot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux "Linux is a computer operating system which is based on free and open source software." "Linux is a leading server operating system, and runs the 10 fastest supercomputers in the world." What you are arguing is semantics, and that's never terribly a productive use of your time. Calling someone out for using a word in a way that you personally don't agree with even though you understood perfectly well what was meant is equally unproductive and pointless, except perhaps to massage your own ego. Doing so when the that usage of the term clearly has copious extant examples demonstrating accepted usage, as in this case (googling the *exact phrase* "Linux operating system" yeilds 4.7 MILLION results), is just trolling. And that, IMO, does deserve to be called out. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. pgpZtLbVsfeCM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NNTP reader?
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 03:13:54PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > I put "legitimate authorities" in quotes because we have no language > police ...unless you live in France, Belgium, Switzerland, or Quebec. =8^) -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. pgpZy2IQTGmUm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NNTP reader?
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 01:39:11PM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: > On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 12:49:20PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > > > Linux is a kernel, not an operating system. > > > > I suggest you not go there (like, ever). This statement is at least > > arguably false on several levels, and its truth value really depends > > on the definitions of some terms that at best have been somewhat fluid > > over time or variable depending on what "authority" you use... It's > > more the matter of religious dogma than technical or literal fact, and > > practically speaking, it matters not at all... All but the most > > neophyte of readers (and probably most of those even, I would guess) > > will understand what was meant. > > Oh brother. This has nothing to do with religious dogma. It's a kernel. > That's it. It's an operating system kernel. Plain and simple. Read this in > case you think otherwise: > > https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Linux_kernel Oh brother indeed. "I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones. This has been brewing since April, and is starting to get ready. I'd like any feedback on things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat (same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons) among other things)." 1. Linus himself calls it an operating system, in that very document to which you referred. 2. Multiple learning materials I used as text books in computer sience and technology classes in college 100 years ago and my own leisure reading defined the operating system as the kernel. 3. There exist a whole classification of products which bear the Linux name which are not just the Linux Kernel, which collectively are referred to as "Linux" by most of the industry (except for GNU bigots^H^H^H^H^H^Henthusiasts). So again, your statement is at least arguably false, on multiple levels. As I said. You can argue these are all wrong if you want to, but I can find "legitimate authorities" to refute that as easily as you can find them to support it. So again, it's dogma, not fact. I put "legitimate authorities" in quotes because we have no language police, other than those self-appointed to the task. There are no true bona fide authorities, only historical usage. Which is fine, because words obtain their meanings in that fashion. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. pgpkuxKN7Qe40.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mutt fails to send
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 11:46:25AM -0700, Alexander Harizanov wrote: > Hi all, > I have mutt under debian lenny. I configured it to work with my gmail > account. When I tried to send email it failed with message "msmtp: envelope > from harizanov.alexan...@gmail.com not accepted by the server msmtp: server > message 530.5.5.1 authentication required" > There is no problem with receiving messages from gmail through fetchmail and > mutt. > Any ideas how to fix this ? what is your msmtp configuration? with the following one I have no problems, excepting you are not receiving this email. 1 defaults 2 auth on 3 tls on 4 tls_starttls on 5 logfile ~/.cache/log/msmtp 6 tls_nocertcheck 7 8 # gmail 9 account gmail 10 host smtp.gmail.com 11 from marco.giu...@gmail.com 12 user marco.giu...@gmail.com 13 password ***
Re: mutt fails to send
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 11:46:25AM -0700, Alexander Harizanov wrote: > Hi all, > I have mutt under debian lenny. I configured it to work with my gmail > account. When I tried to send email it failed with message "msmtp: envelope > from harizanov.alexan...@gmail.com not accepted by the server msmtp: server > message 530.5.5.1 authentication required" > There is no problem with receiving messages from gmail through fetchmail and > mutt. > Any ideas how to fix this ? Gmail need STARTTLS. http://www.scottro.net/qnd/qnd-gmail.html -- Ivo Engelhardt
mutt fails to send
Hi all, I have mutt under debian lenny. I configured it to work with my gmail account. When I tried to send email it failed with message "msmtp: envelope from harizanov.alexan...@gmail.com not accepted by the server msmtp: server message 530.5.5.1 authentication required" There is no problem with receiving messages from gmail through fetchmail and mutt. Any ideas how to fix this ?
Re: NNTP reader?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:46:43PM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: > On 09/30/2011 01:04 PM, David Champion wrote: > > Linux is just a server platform, and attempts to make it anything more > > than that (desktop, embedded system, etc.) are silly. If you must > > absolutely have POSIX and a desktop, then Linux isn't for you. I would > > recomend using MacOS (http://apple.com). > > Linux is a kernel, not an operating system. I suggest you not go there (like, ever). This statement is at least arguably false on several levels, and its truth value really depends on the definitions of some terms that at best have been somewhat fluid over time or variable depending on what "authority" you use... It's more the matter of religious dogma than technical or literal fact, and practically speaking, it matters not at all... All but the most neophyte of readers (and probably most of those even, I would guess) will understand what was meant. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. pgpvbCiS2VVGY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NNTP reader?
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 02:33:45PM +, Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2011-09-30, Aaron Toponce wrote: > > On 09/29/2011 06:17 AM, Leonardo M. Ram? wrote: > >> Hi, does anyone knows if it can be possible to read/subscribe to newsgroups > >> (nntp) with mutt?. > > > > Mutt is just an MUA, and attempts to extend it into anything more than > > that (RSS reader, NNTP reader, etc.) are silly IMO. If you must > > absolutely have NNTP and mail, then Mutt isn't for you. I would > > recommend using Gnus (http://gnus.org). > > Many mutt users find slrn to be sufficiently "mutt-like" that they > decide to forget about trying to pound the mutt peg into the nntp > hole. > Personally I use tin rather than slrn as it seems to fit my 'mutt mind' better. -- Chris Green
Re: NNTP reader?
On 2011-09-30, Aaron Toponce wrote: > On 09/29/2011 06:17 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: >> Hi, does anyone knows if it can be possible to read/subscribe to newsgroups >> (nntp) with mutt?. > > Mutt is just an MUA, and attempts to extend it into anything more than > that (RSS reader, NNTP reader, etc.) are silly IMO. If you must > absolutely have NNTP and mail, then Mutt isn't for you. I would > recommend using Gnus (http://gnus.org). Many mutt users find slrn to be sufficiently "mutt-like" that they decide to forget about trying to pound the mutt peg into the nntp hole. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! I'm using my X-RAY at VISION to obtain a rare gmail.comglimpse of the INNER WORKINGS of this POTATO!!
Re: Duplicate MESSAGE-ID
Hi afshin, do you use a new instance of mutt for each mail? If yes I'd recommend that you better use a local MTA as postfix or exim (or sendmail) instead of piping all through mutt and create each mail yourself. You could also try to reuse the mutt-instance by scripting it's standard-in. The reallly best solution would be to use a own script with a combination of a sendmail-interface. Kind regards, Andre --Originalnachricht-- Von: afshin afzali Absender:owner-mutt-us...@mutt.org An:mutt-users Betreff: Duplicate MESSAGE-ID Gesendet: 3. Okt. 2011 15:01 Hi Guys, I use mutt 1.4.2.2i (CentOS 5.6 x86_64) in my application to send email. In case of calling mutt in a loop, there are emails which have identical MESSAGE-ID ! do you expect this behavior ? BEST, -- afshin Gesendet via BlackBerry
Re: Duplicate MESSAGE-ID
* On 03 Oct 2011, afshin afzali wrote: > Hi Guys, > > I use mutt 1.4.2.2i (CentOS 5.6 x86_64) in my application to send > email. In case of calling mutt in a loop, there are emails which have > identical MESSAGE-ID ! do you expect this behavior ? It's been many years, but as I remember that was a known bug in 1.4 that is fixed in 1.5.x. -- David Champion • d...@uchicago.edu • IT Services • University of Chicago
Duplicate MESSAGE-ID
Hi Guys, I use mutt 1.4.2.2i (CentOS 5.6 x86_64) in my application to send email. In case of calling mutt in a loop, there are emails which have identical MESSAGE-ID ! do you expect this behavior ? BEST, -- afshin
