Re: View HTML without autoview

[David Woodfall]

On (14/03/18 23:23), Dave Woodfall  put forth the 
proposition:

On (14/03/18 16:01), Ian Zimmerman  put forth the 
proposition:

On 2018-03-14 13:13, David Woodfall wrote:


Previously, I used elinks and it works fine with autoview, however
when I try to pipe to it it also renders the headers instead of just
the body.


When you try a pipe, is that piping the message (as a pipe command would
do in the index view) or just the html MIME part (as a pipe command in
the attachment view would do)?


It does the whole message. I seem to get messages where the entire
message is html with no separate html part. Mostly from ebay.co.uk,
even though I set to receive mail in plain text only.


I'm still curious about how autoview works with elinks and that
nametemplate though.


The binding I have for viewing HTML is a macro which opens the
attachment view, searches for the html part and then calls the
view-mailcap command.

--
Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
To reply privately _only_ on Usenet and on broken lists
which rewrite From, fetch the TXT record for no-use.mooo.com.


Ha. I chatted to ebay tech support today because they
keep sending me these HTML emails even though I have set to receive
plain text. Well they must have changed something because I just had
the first mail since then and there was no body apart from:

[-- This text/html attachment (size 135K bytes) has been deleted --]
[-- on Wed, 14 Mar 2018 23:41:06 + --]

No text attachment or anything else. Fun. Well at least it didn't have
any of those icons that mess up my terminal.

Re: View HTML without autoview

[David Woodfall]

On (14/03/18 16:01), Ian Zimmerman  put forth the 
proposition:

On 2018-03-14 13:13, David Woodfall wrote:


> Previously, I used elinks and it works fine with autoview, however
> when I try to pipe to it it also renders the headers instead of just
> the body.


When you try a pipe, is that piping the message (as a pipe command would
do in the index view) or just the html MIME part (as a pipe command in
the attachment view would do)?


It does the whole message. I seem to get messages where the entire
message is html with no separate html part. Mostly from ebay.co.uk,
even though I set to receive mail in plain text only.


I'm still curious about how autoview works with elinks and that
nametemplate though.


The binding I have for viewing HTML is a macro which opens the
attachment view, searches for the html part and then calls the
view-mailcap command.

--
Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
To reply privately _only_ on Usenet and on broken lists
which rewrite From, fetch the TXT record for no-use.mooo.com.

Re: View HTML without autoview

[Ian Zimmerman]

On 2018-03-14 13:13, David Woodfall wrote:

> > Previously, I used elinks and it works fine with autoview, however
> > when I try to pipe to it it also renders the headers instead of just
> > the body.

When you try a pipe, is that piping the message (as a pipe command would
do in the index view) or just the html MIME part (as a pipe command in
the attachment view would do)?

> I'm still curious about how autoview works with elinks and that
> nametemplate though.

The binding I have for viewing HTML is a macro which opens the
attachment view, searches for the html part and then calls the
view-mailcap command.

-- 
Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
To reply privately _only_ on Usenet and on broken lists
which rewrite From, fetch the TXT record for no-use.mooo.com.

Re: Mailing list status

[Sandro Santilli]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 10:23:13AM -0700, Will Yardley wrote:

>:0
>* ^List-Post: .*mutt-users@(osuosl|mutt)\.org
>.mutt-users/

Thanks Will, I was hoping to get this back from my mail :)

--strk;

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[Grant Edwards]

On 2018-03-14, Scott Kostyshak  wrote:

> I have no idea if the following is good advice or not, but I'll mention
> it and let you investigate, unless the other method works well for you.
>
> You can "bounce" an email with the "b" key.

[...]

I've found that another disadvantage of bouncing e-mails to addresses
that aren't contained in the message headers is that some e-mail
systems will think they're spam and discard them.  What I don't grok
is how an SMTP server would differentiate between a bounced message
and a bcc'd message.

-- 
Grant Edwards   grant.b.edwardsYow! RHAPSODY in Glue!
  at   
  gmail.com

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[David Woodfall]

On (14/03/18 12:01), Scott Kostyshak  put forth the 
proposition:

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:48:56PM +, David Woodfall wrote:

I have recently been in a discussion with a tech support person about
some emails that I have been receiving and I was asked to attach one
of them to a test email that she sent me.

I couldn't find how to do that, apart from actually finding the file
and attaching it that way. When I pressed 'a' to attach and then '?'
for a list I had a list of my folders up, but mutt wouldn't let me enter
them and gave a 'couldn't attach ' error.

Is there a way of doing this?


I have no idea if the following is good advice or not, but I'll mention
it and let you investigate, unless the other method works well for you.

You can "bounce" an email with the "b" key. The advantage of this is
that I believe the recipient will see the email just as you saw it. i.e.
all of the headers will be the same. When you attach an email (as per
the other solution), I'm not sure the headers are preserved. The
disadvantage is that the email will look strange if the person is not
expecting it (because the To: header will be to you!), so you should
always warn the recipient (in my case, usually a tech team).

Best,

Scott


--
Scott Kostyshak
Assistant Professor of Economics
University of Florida
https://people.clas.ufl.edu/skostyshak/


In this case I had to attach one email to another and send it back to
the tech support person, so using the 'A' to attach is perfect.

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:48:56PM +, David Woodfall wrote:
> I have recently been in a discussion with a tech support person about
> some emails that I have been receiving and I was asked to attach one
> of them to a test email that she sent me.
> 
> I couldn't find how to do that, apart from actually finding the file
> and attaching it that way. When I pressed 'a' to attach and then '?'
> for a list I had a list of my folders up, but mutt wouldn't let me enter
> them and gave a 'couldn't attach ' error.
> 
> Is there a way of doing this?

I have no idea if the following is good advice or not, but I'll mention
it and let you investigate, unless the other method works well for you.

You can "bounce" an email with the "b" key. The advantage of this is
that I believe the recipient will see the email just as you saw it. i.e.
all of the headers will be the same. When you attach an email (as per
the other solution), I'm not sure the headers are preserved. The
disadvantage is that the email will look strange if the person is not
expecting it (because the To: header will be to you!), so you should
always warn the recipient (in my case, usually a tech team).

Best,

Scott


-- 
Scott Kostyshak
Assistant Professor of Economics
University of Florida
https://people.clas.ufl.edu/skostyshak/

Re: Mailing list status

[Will Yardley]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 09:27:06AM +0100, Sandro Santilli wrote:
> What I use for procmail (if anyone finds it useful):
> 
>   :0
>   * ^List-Post: .*mutt-users@mutt.org
>   .mutt-users/
> 
>   :0
>   * ^List-Post: .*mutt-us...@osuosl.org
>   .mutt-users/

Don't forget to escape your literal dots in procmail recipes, mutt\.org
vs. mutt.org.

   :0
   * ^List-Post: .*mutt-users@(osuosl|mutt)\.org
   .mutt-users/

In this case, above should work, consolidating into one recipe (you can
also use |\ to chain conditions vs. making it two condition).

w

Re: what does the leading - mean in the attachment view?

[Kevin J. McCarthy]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 01:29:41PM +0800, Yubin Ruan wrote:
> Just out of curious: in the attachment view (of the compose view), there are
> some attachments with a - before them:
> 
> ---
> - I1 /path/to/file1   [text/plain, 7 bit, us-ascii, 13]
> - A1 /path/to/file2   [text/plain, 7 bit, us-ascii, 13]
> 
> what does that - mean?

It's the %u in $attach_format.  It will show '-' if the attachment will
be unlinked after sending.  This is usually the case for tempfiles.

If you invoke 'G' , it converts an attachment to a
tempfile and sets the unlink flag.

'u'  toggles the state of the flag.  Use with extreme
caution on non-tempfiles.

-- 
Kevin J. McCarthy
GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C  5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[Tim Chase]

On 2018-03-15 00:37, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> Yup, forward:
> View the email to attach.
> Hit 'f', and mutt will prompt: Forward as attachment? ([yes]/no):
> Hit Enter, compose the accompanying email, with forward address,
> etc.

I just tried this (both with an individual message as well as tagging
multiple and using ";f" to forward the tagged messages) and they
ended up in-line by default.  It looks like you might have to fiddle
with the mime_forward quad-option which defaults to "no", setting it
to an "ask*" option.

-tkc

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[David Woodfall]

On (14/03/18 14:22), Bastian  put forth the 
proposition:

On 14Mar18 12:48 +, David Woodfall wrote:

I couldn't find how to do that, apart from actually finding the file
and attaching it that way. When I pressed 'a' to attach and then '?'
for a list I had a list of my folders up, but mutt wouldn't let me enter
them and gave a 'couldn't attach ' error.

Is there a way of doing this?


a - attach-file- attach file(s) to this message
A - attach-message - attach message(s) to this message

I don't remember all the keybindings. I have to look up especially those
which are rarely used. I find it really helpful to hit '?' on the
current view to get the list of keybindings along with their
description. You can search within that list with '/'. In your case,
searching for 'attach' you'll find the command 'attach-message'. Maybe
this helps a bit.


Cheers,
--
Bastian


Thanks, 'A' does the trick.

Dave

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[David Woodfall]

On (15/03/18 00:37), Erik Christiansen  put forth the 
proposition:

On 14.03.18 12:48, David Woodfall wrote:

I have recently been in a discussion with a tech support person about
some emails that I have been receiving and I was asked to attach one
of them to a test email that she sent me.

I couldn't find how to do that, apart from actually finding the file
and attaching it that way. When I pressed 'a' to attach and then '?'
for a list I had a list of my folders up, but mutt wouldn't let me enter
them and gave a 'couldn't attach ' error.

Is there a way of doing this?


Yup, forward:
View the email to attach.
Hit 'f', and mutt will prompt: Forward as attachment? ([yes]/no):
Hit Enter, compose the accompanying email, with forward address, etc.

Erik


When I press 'f' I just get a 'To' prompt, then it goes straight to
the send window.

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[Yubin Ruan]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 02:22:26PM +0100, Bastian wrote:
> On 14Mar18 12:48 +, David Woodfall wrote:
> > I couldn't find how to do that, apart from actually finding the file
> > and attaching it that way. When I pressed 'a' to attach and then '?'
> > for a list I had a list of my folders up, but mutt wouldn't let me enter
> > them and gave a 'couldn't attach ' error.
> > 
> > Is there a way of doing this?
> 
> a - attach-file- attach file(s) to this message
> A - attach-message - attach message(s) to this message
> 
> I don't remember all the keybindings. I have to look up especially those 
> which are rarely used. I find it really helpful to hit '?' on the 
> current view to get the list of keybindings along with their 
> description. You can search within that list with '/'. In your case, 
> searching for 'attach' you'll find the command 'attach-message'. Maybe 
> this helps a bit.

Whoop! This is much cleaner!

Yubin

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[Erik Christiansen]

On 14.03.18 12:48, David Woodfall wrote:
> I have recently been in a discussion with a tech support person about
> some emails that I have been receiving and I was asked to attach one
> of them to a test email that she sent me.
> 
> I couldn't find how to do that, apart from actually finding the file
> and attaching it that way. When I pressed 'a' to attach and then '?'
> for a list I had a list of my folders up, but mutt wouldn't let me enter
> them and gave a 'couldn't attach ' error.
> 
> Is there a way of doing this?

Yup, forward:
View the email to attach.
Hit 'f', and mutt will prompt: Forward as attachment? ([yes]/no):
Hit Enter, compose the accompanying email, with forward address, etc.

Erik

Re: Reply with another email as attachment?

[Bastian]

On 14Mar18 12:48 +, David Woodfall wrote:
> I couldn't find how to do that, apart from actually finding the file
> and attaching it that way. When I pressed 'a' to attach and then '?'
> for a list I had a list of my folders up, but mutt wouldn't let me enter
> them and gave a 'couldn't attach ' error.
> 
> Is there a way of doing this?

a - attach-file- attach file(s) to this message
A - attach-message - attach message(s) to this message

I don't remember all the keybindings. I have to look up especially those 
which are rarely used. I find it really helpful to hit '?' on the 
current view to get the list of keybindings along with their 
description. You can search within that list with '/'. In your case, 
searching for 'attach' you'll find the command 'attach-message'. Maybe 
this helps a bit.


Cheers,
-- 
Bastian

Re: View HTML without autoview

[David Woodfall]

On (14/03/18 12:53), Dave Woodfall  put forth the 
proposition:

I've just found reason to not autoview HTML and to do it manually with
a bind.

Previously, I used elinks and it works fine with autoview, however
when I try to pipe to it it also renders the headers instead of just
the body.

This is my mailcap:

text/html;elinks %s;nametemplate=%s.html;copiousoutput

Is there a way of replicating that in a bind? What is this template?


I've just noticed that there's an unauto_view command. Making a bind
to auto_view and unauto_view works fine.

I'm still curious about how autoview works with elinks and that
nametemplate though.

View HTML without autoview

[David Woodfall]

I've just found reason to not autoview HTML and to do it manually with
a bind. 


Previously, I used elinks and it works fine with autoview, however
when I try to pipe to it it also renders the headers instead of just
the body.

This is my mailcap:

text/html;elinks %s;nametemplate=%s.html;copiousoutput

Is there a way of replicating that in a bind? What is this template?

Reply with another email as attachment?

[David Woodfall]

I have recently been in a discussion with a tech support person about
some emails that I have been receiving and I was asked to attach one
of them to a test email that she sent me.

I couldn't find how to do that, apart from actually finding the file
and attaching it that way. When I pressed 'a' to attach and then '?'
for a list I had a list of my folders up, but mutt wouldn't let me enter
them and gave a 'couldn't attach ' error.

Is there a way of doing this?

Re: Mailing list status

[Sandro Santilli]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 07:59:45PM -0400, Fred Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 03:05:47PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 02:39:47PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> > > OSUOSL is making some adjustments to the lists right now (to fix the
> > > errant http://mutt.org/mailman) links.  I think they have accidentally
> > > goofed up the list ids and headers in the process.  I've let them know
> > > about the problem - sorry for the confusion.
> > 
> > Replying to myself to check the headers.  Please pardon the noise.
> 
> well, FWIW, I just happened to have set procmail to use a header
> that (so far) remains intact, so (again, so far) I'm golden:
> 
>   # mutt-users
>   :0:
>   * ^TOmutt-users
>   | $FORMAIL -A"X-procmail: Mutt-Users" >>$HOME/Mail/mutt-users
> 
>   # mutt-announce
>   :0:
>   * ^TOmutt-announce
>   | $FORMAIL -A"X-procmail: Mutt-Users" >>$HOME/Mail/mutt-users

What I use for procmail (if anyone finds it useful):

  :0
  * ^List-Post: .*mutt-users@mutt.org
  .mutt-users/

  :0
  * ^List-Post: .*mutt-us...@osuosl.org
  .mutt-users/

NOTE: the above two rules can probably be merged but I'm staying
on the safe side

--strk;