Re: scoring top posters
On 2015-09-20 09:06 +0200, Matthias Apitz wrote: > > ... so, no matter how "bad" a message is (let's say, a top post, a > > thread hijack, an ALL CAPS subject, and unlimited line length LOL), the > > worst it can score is 0. Am I right? I haven't used mutt scoring yet, > > so I am trying to learn how to best put it to my purposes. It seems > > to me that for flagging "badness" positive scores would be much more > > convenient. Am I missing something as usual? > > You missed, that you can score as well positive values and the rules are > summed up to a final score value, "rouded" to zero if at the end of the > day negative. See my score part of my ~/.muttrc (some mail addrs > overwritten with ). But you have to start with some arbitrary value as the default score (10 in your case) and you're still limited how low you can go before your negative scores are clipped (to use a photography term which seems oddly apt). What is the reason for this design decision in mutt, I wonder? Is it just the ambiguity when trying to parse score CONDITION -1 where -1 could be the negative score -1, or it could be an abbreviated range with upper bound +1. That could be easily fixed by changing the range separator, for example to "..". -- Please *no* private copies of mailing list or newsgroup messages. Rule 420: All persons more than eight miles high to leave the court.
Re: scoring top posters
El día Saturday, September 19, 2015 a las 07:46:53PM -0700, Ian Zimmerman
escribió:
> Back to my bad habit of resurrecting old threads :)
>
> Do you really score "bad" messages with _negative_ scores? The manual
> says (section 3.24):
>
> A message's final score is the sum total of all matching score
> entries. However, you may optionally prefix value with an equal sign
> (“=”) to cause evaluation to stop at a particular entry if there is a
> match. Negative final scores are rounded up to 0.
>
> ... so, no matter how "bad" a message is (let's say, a top post, a
> thread hijack, an ALL CAPS subject, and unlimited line length LOL), the
> worst it can score is 0. Am I right? I haven't used mutt scoring yet,
> so I am trying to learn how to best put it to my purposes. It seems
> to me that for flagging "badness" positive scores would be much more
> convenient. Am I missing something as usual?
You missed, that you can score as well positive values and the rules are
summed up to a final score value, "rouded" to zero if at the end of the
day negative. See my score part of my ~/.muttrc (some mail addrs
overwritten with ).
matthias
...
# scoring:
#
# see http://www.mutt.org/doc/devel/manual.html#score-command
#
# the start was also loosely based on:
http://www.strcat.de/dotfiles/mutt.scoring
#
#
# Note: Scoring on a (X-)Header or Body won't work due to performance issue,
only
# information from the Index (like Subject: To: From: ,,,) can be scored.
# this will show the score value (%4N) on the left of the Index
#
set index_format="%4N %4C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%?l?%4l&%4c?) %s"
# set the threshold values
#
set score_threshold_delete=0# delete messages with score 0
set score_threshold_flag=50 # auto-flag messages w/ score >= 50
set score_threshold_read=5 # mark messages w/ score <= 5 as read
# First remove all scorings
#
unscore *
# Default - Scoring
#
score '~A'+10 # all messages start with
score 10
score '~g|~G' +2 # PGP signed / encrypted
messages
score ~F +20 # flagged mails are
important
score ~D =0 # this is a deleted email
score ~S =0 # superseded messages
# The good ones
#
score '~t g...@unixarea.de' +20 # i'm quite important
score '~f g...@unixarea.de' +20 # i'm quite important
score '~s ubuntu-phone' +10 #
score '~f webmas...@cubaliteraria.cu' +10 # Cuba Literaria
score '~f epilob...@aol.com' +30 # needs +30 due to -30
for AOL
# SPAM(er)
#
score '~f xxx...@gmail.com' -30 #
score '~f x...@hiwaay.net' -30 #
score '~f @aol.com' -30 #
score '~f webmaster@*'-10 # Webmasters kidnapped by
evil cult :>
score '~s ^test$' - # all messages w/ subject
"test" are killed
score '~s sex | ~s adult' - # STFU
score '~f anonymous' - # Yeah. Sure. Evil hackers
score '~='- # all duplicates are
killed
score '~s ^unsubscribe$ !(~p|~P|~Q|~F)' - # all msgs w/ subject
"unsubscribe" not by myself are killed
score '~s "for sale"' - # sale yout compter.
moron..
score '!~f@' - # no mail address present?
score "~f '^([^ <>@]+ ){5,}'" - # a realname consisting
of >=5 portions is invalid, too
# threads I do not want anymore becaused I'm tired of the Subject:
#
score '~s "Gmirror/graid or hardware raid"' -
score '~s "Questions about freebsd-update"' -
score '~s "Microsoft Now OpenBSD Foundation"' -
score '~s "Building TB from source code"' -
score '~s "^Facebook$"' -
score '~s "^Re: Facebook$"' -
score '~s "How to change mouse cursor to standard hand cursor"' -
score '~s "USB stick and some help with it"' -
score '~s "interesting comment from a poster on phoronix"' -
score '~s "HTTPS on freebsd.org, git, reproducible builds"' -
...
--
Matthias Apitz, ✉ g...@unixarea.de, 🌐 http://www.unixarea.de/ ☎
+49-176-38902045
No! Nein! ¡No! Όχι! -- Ευχαριστούμε!
Re: scoring top posters
On 2015-07-29 20:19 +0200, Matthias Apitz wrote: > I'm using scoring to mark, auto delete, ... certain mails I do not > want to read. I'd like to auto-score top posters for the next > mail. For the first mail it is not possible due to scoring is based on > header lines. But the sender could be scored with -10 or -20 for the > next mail... Back to my bad habit of resurrecting old threads :) Do you really score "bad" messages with _negative_ scores? The manual says (section 3.24): A message's final score is the sum total of all matching score entries. However, you may optionally prefix value with an equal sign (“=”) to cause evaluation to stop at a particular entry if there is a match. Negative final scores are rounded up to 0. ... so, no matter how "bad" a message is (let's say, a top post, a thread hijack, an ALL CAPS subject, and unlimited line length LOL), the worst it can score is 0. Am I right? I haven't used mutt scoring yet, so I am trying to learn how to best put it to my purposes. It seems to me that for flagging "badness" positive scores would be much more convenient. Am I missing something as usual? -- Please *no* private copies of mailing list or newsgroup messages. Rule 420: All persons more than eight miles high to leave the court.
Re: scoring top posters
Hello, (I'm top posting here con intention to see how t-prot[1] will later react on this mail). I have installed it and it detects, for example, if the quoted lines exeeds the limit (default=30); but it does not detect, at least I could not figure out how, a "normal" top posting like this one here. Do I soemthing wrong? matthias El día Thursday, July 30, 2015 a las 11:09:03PM +0200, Dirk Griesbach escribió: > Am Do, 30. Jul 2015 um 22:24:03 +0200 schrieb Heinz Diehl: > > First: you can't do that using procmail alone. A perl, python, ruby or > > whatever script will be needed. Simply pipe all incoming mail to your > > script via procmail. > > May I suggest t-prot[1] which works great as a display filter in mutt? > It also allows to detect such things for scripting purposes. > > Dirk > > [1] http://www.escape.de/~tolot/mutt/ -- Matthias Apitz, ✉ g...@unixarea.de, http://www.unixarea.de/ ☎ +49-176-38902045 No! Nein! ¡No! Όχι! -- Ευχαριστούμε!
Re: scoring top posters
Am Do, 30. Jul 2015 um 22:24:03 +0200 schrieb Heinz Diehl: > First: you can't do that using procmail alone. A perl, python, ruby or > whatever script will be needed. Simply pipe all incoming mail to your > script via procmail. May I suggest t-prot[1] which works great as a display filter in mutt? It also allows to detect such things for scripting purposes. Dirk [1] http://www.escape.de/~tolot/mutt/
Re: scoring top posters
On Thu Jul 30 22:24:03 2015, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> That said, I doubt such a script which *reliably* detects top-postings
> can be done. As a starting point for your language problem: simply
> check if the first line in the mail body ends with a colon (":").
It’s not so simple. The first line of the previous mail doesn’t end with
a colon and it wasn’t a top posting one.
--
alarig
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: scoring top posters
On 30.07.2015, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> A top posting we see, when in the body of the mail before a line like
> this:
>
> On 29 Jul 2015, Matthias Apitz wrote:
>
> are some other text lines. Of course we need here a good regular
> expression because the line 'On 29 Jul 2015, Matthias Apitz wrote:'
> is highly configurable and language dependent.
First: you can't do that using procmail alone. A perl, python, ruby or
whatever script will be needed. Simply pipe all incoming mail to your
script via procmail.
That said, I doubt such a script which *reliably* detects top-postings
can be done. As a starting point for your language problem: simply
check if the first line in the mail body ends with a colon (":").
Re: scoring top posters
Hi Mattias -
* On 30 Jul 2015, Matthias Apitz wrote:
>
> are some other text lines. Of course we need here a good regular
> expression because the line 'On 29 Jul 2015, Matthias Apitz wrote:'
> is highly configurable and language dependent.
That's why I wouldn't do it with anything regular-expression-based, like
mutt. Here's an example procmail rule which I haven't tested.
toppostlines=`awk '/^>/ {exit;} /^ *$/ {next;} /^[^ ]*:/ {next;} {total += 1;}
END {print total}'`
:0 f
| formail -i "X-Top-Post-Lines: $toppostlines"
This tells how many non-blank lines occur between the header and quoted
text, without regard to what's in those lines. Two or three is probably
not top-posty. You could go further and count unquoted lines AFTER the
first quoted line. Then mutt can score on X-Top-Post-Lines.
This doesn't help with any encoded mail -- you'd need a smarter filter
for that. Smart decoding and inability to run filters on your mail
service are the main reasons you would want to do it inside mutt, but
that seems very challenging at best (and impossible at worst).
Making this more general is left as an exercise. But I wouldn't
recommend it really. I find personally that downscoring top-posters is
a pretty poor way to judge content. If it works for you, great, but you
must not exchange email with very many normal people. :)
--
David Champion • d...@bikeshed.us
Re: scoring top posters
El día Wednesday, July 29, 2015 a las 03:52:01PM -0400, Fred Smith escribió: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:38:30PM -0500, David Champion wrote: > > Simplest idea I have is to add a procmail (or whatever) rule to detect > > top-posting, > > then insert a yes or no header into the message: > > > > X-Top-Posted: yes > > > > Then it's trivial to score it in mutt. > > and just to satisfy my curiosity, how would such a procmail rule look/work? A top posting we see, when in the body of the mail before a line like this: On 29 Jul 2015, Matthias Apitz wrote: are some other text lines. Of course we need here a good regular expression because the line 'On 29 Jul 2015, Matthias Apitz wrote:' is highly configurable and language dependent. matthias -- Matthias Apitz, ✉ g...@unixarea.de, http://www.unixarea.de/ ☎ +49-176-38902045 No! Nein! ¡No! Όχι! -- Ευχαριστούμε!
Re: scoring top posters
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:38:30PM -0500, David Champion wrote: > Simplest idea I have is to add a procmail (or whatever) rule to detect > top-posting, > then insert a yes or no header into the message: > > X-Top-Posted: yes > > Then it's trivial to score it in mutt. and just to satisfy my curiosity, how would such a procmail rule look/work? -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - "For him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy--to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen." - Jude 1:24,25 (niv) -
Re: scoring top posters
Simplest idea I have is to add a procmail (or whatever) rule to detect top-posting, then insert a yes or no header into the message: X-Top-Posted: yes Then it's trivial to score it in mutt. * On 29 Jul 2015, Matthias Apitz wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm using scoring to mark, auto delete, ... certain mails I do not want > to read. I'd like to auto-score top posters for the next mail. For the > first mail it is not possible due to scoring is based on header lines. > But the sender could be scored with -10 or -20 for the next mail... > > Any ideas how to implement this as automagically? Sorry, couldn't resist the top-posting. :) -- David Champion • d...@bikeshed.us
scoring top posters
Hello, I'm using scoring to mark, auto delete, ... certain mails I do not want to read. I'd like to auto-score top posters for the next mail. For the first mail it is not possible due to scoring is based on header lines. But the sender could be scored with -10 or -20 for the next mail... Any ideas how to implement this as automagically? Thx matthias -- Sent from my Ubuntu phone with mutt. Matthias Apitz, g...@unixarea.de, http://www.unixarea.de/ +49-176-38902045 No! Nein! ¡No! Όχι! -- Ευχαριστούμε!
when does re-scoring occour
Hi all, is there a specific event / command to re-evaluate the message scoring? I have a set of scores that rely on "~d >2d", but as long as my mutt instance lives it is never re-evaluated. So as my mutt runs mostly for weeks the score gets stays at the value that correct days ago, no matter if I change the mailbox, or resource the whole muttrc. Also a small side question: why is the minimal date range 1 day, and no hours / minutes available? And does anybody know a real use for superseded messages, I think I never saw one in the wild? Thanks and regards, Andre -- Andre Klärner smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Scoring threads
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 12:00:14PM +0200, Alexandre wrote: Suppose you want to score all threads with this form: A>B>A>B without any specifications about the name of authors. Is it possible ? I'm not aware of any way to do this generically. me
Re: Scoring threads
Many thanks for your answer. One more question though: Le mercredi 13 avril de l'année 2011, vers 09 heures et 39 minutes, Michael Elkins écrivait: > >- if you really don't want to read what person A has to say when she's > >following up to person B, but want to read what she says when she's > >following up to person C > > This is tricky, at least with mailing lists. Mutt can't match on a > message that the current message *refers* to, but if the Alice is > following up to Eve, and Eve's email address appears in the recipient > list, you can do something like this: > > ~f alice ~C eve > > Or if you want all Alice's replies, except when responding to Bob: > > ~f alice !~f bob Suppose you want to score all threads with this form: A>B>A>B without any specifications about the name of authors. Is it possible ? -- Alexandre Delanoë
Re: Scoring threads
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 06:52:05PM +0200, Alexandre wrote: - if you're really interested in what a person has to say only when she's talking about a particular subject ~f alice ~s 'interesting topic' - if you really don't want to read what person A has to say when she's following up to person B, but want to read what she says when she's following up to person C This is tricky, at least with mailing lists. Mutt can't match on a message that the current message *refers* to, but if the Alice is following up to Eve, and Eve's email address appears in the recipient list, you can do something like this: ~f alice ~C eve Or if you want all Alice's replies, except when responding to Bob: ~f alice !~f bob me
Scoring threads
Hi Scoring on Subjects and From headers is nice enough (man muttrc), but how to score this: - if you're really interested in what a person has to say only when she's talking about a particular subject - if you really don't want to read what person A has to say when she's following up to person B, but want to read what she says when she's following up to person C Indeed, there are solutions with emacs: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/gnus/Advanced-Scoring.html#Advanced-Scoring But how to do this with mutt ? Many thanks for sharing your ideas on this issue. -- Alexandre Delanoë
Re: [message scoring] Is it possible to ... ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday, March 24 at 03:30 PM, quoth Michael Tatge: >Is it working? Somehow. >If I manually enter the score it works. If I put the line in muttrc it's >not. Even if I source that file in a folder-hook it seems the message >parsing comes too late for the score to work. Bug? It's probably an ordering problem: the score is calculated *before* the mailbox is sorted (so that it can be used as a sorting mechanism or displayed), and yet thread relationships are established as *part* of sorting the mailbox and so cannot be used until *after* the mailbox is sorted. And *after* the mailbox is sorted, the scores are not re-calculated unless you enter in some new ones. So, if you put in your scores as part of a folder-hook or as part of your muttrc, those patterns are evaluated before thread relationships between messages have been established. However, if you type your scores in manually, while looking at a sorted mailbox, they are being evaluated AFTER thread relationships have been established. My guess is that those scores wouldn't do *anything* if you first sorted your mailbox by date-received (i.e. if you didn't sort by threads). I think this is probably an intentional design flaw, as weird as that sounds. Mutt doesn't figure out thread relationships if it doesn't have to, because doing so is (or once was) computationally expensive and requires analyzing all messages in the mailbox. So the mutt designers put off doing that calculation until the last possible moment: sorting. Unfortunately, this means that stuff like this---scoring and anything else that happens BEFORE messages are sorted (e.g. things triggered by folder-hooks)---*CANNOT* get access to that thread-relationship information. Nor can they get access to that thread-relationship information if the thread-based sort doesn't happen (i.e. if you've sorted your messages in some other way). You probably want to try to sweet-talk the mutt developers into re-evaluating scores after the thread-relationships are established (which, of course, has the potential to force the messages to be re-sorted; consider what happens if sort_aux=score). Ideally, thread-relationships would be figured out independently of sorting... but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. ~Kyle - -- It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues. -- Abraham Lincoln -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iEYEARECAAYFAknI+SsACgkQBkIOoMqOI15TOwCg97uYgi6L9wdQtZC+fO6PqmHy Y9IAoIKAiQyNhxXclDYBGjpkQtyOTXaO =oJhN -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [message scoring] Is it possible to ... ?
* On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 08:41PM +0900 Wilkinson, Alex (alex.wilkin...@dsto.defence.gov.au) muttered: > I would like to score any thread that i have replied to i.e. the > entire thread. > > Is this possible ? If yes, any pointers ? Let's see - what does the manual say about score? Usage: score pattern value Ok, now what patterns do we have? ~Q messages which have been replied to ~(PATTERN) messages in threads containing messages matching a certain pattern, e.g. all threads containing messages from you: ~(~P) Is it working? Somehow. If I manually enter the score it works. If I put the line in muttrc it's not. Even if I source that file in a folder-hook it seems the message parsing comes too late for the score to work. Bug? HTH, Michael -- "...Unix, MS-DOS, and Windows NT (also known as the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly)." (By Matt Welsh) PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC1A44DD Jabber: init...@amessage.de
[message scoring] Is it possible to ... ?
Hi all, I would like to score any thread that i have replied to i.e. the entire thread. Is this possible ? If yes, any pointers ? -aW IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Australian Defence Organisation and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the CRIMES ACT 1914. If you have received this email in error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email.
Re: envelope-to and scoring
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 18:18, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wednesday, March 4 at 05:33 PM, quoth ssiza...@gmail.com: >> Well it would make sense if any of your examples worked, but >> unfortunately they don't. >> >> I've tried mixing " and ' myself, except for the >> escaping-quotes-trick. That's new, but gives me an error message as >> well. > > Ah! Right! Because, according to the manual > (http://www.mutt.org/doc/devel/manual.html#score-command): > > note: For efficiency reasons, patterns which scan information not > available in the index, such as ˜b, ˜B or ˜h, may not be used > > Personally, I think that's a silly restriction, but you'd have to take > that up with the developers. Ah ok, sorry I didn't see that myself. I guess I'll just use ~f mailinglist or something like that to take care of the scoring. Thanks, Meli
Re: envelope-to and scoring
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 4 at 05:33 PM, quoth ssiza...@gmail.com: > Well it would make sense if any of your examples worked, but > unfortunately they don't. > > I've tried mixing " and ' myself, except for the > escaping-quotes-trick. That's new, but gives me an error message as > well. Ah! Right! Because, according to the manual (http://www.mutt.org/doc/devel/manual.html#score-command): note: For efficiency reasons, patterns which scan information not available in the index, such as ˜b, ˜B or ˜h, may not be used Personally, I think that's a silly restriction, but you'd have to take that up with the developers. ~Kyle - -- Formal symbolic representation of qualitative entities is doomed to its rightful place of minor significance in a world where flowers and beautiful women abound. -- Albert Einstein -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iEYEARECAAYFAkmut/UACgkQBkIOoMqOI15AegCfSKuUcfDOeH8OqbqeTauruubA lcAAmwc55oxf21OidREgvkKSUCSJ81nS =n94l -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: envelope-to and scoring
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 17:18, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wednesday, March 4 at 05:01 PM, quoth ssiza...@gmail.com: >> ~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com' >> >>works when I'm limiting messages once inside the folder, but >> >>score '~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com'' 41 >> >>in my .muttrc doesn't. > > Obviously. It gets parsed as the strings: > > score > ~h ^Envelope-to: > u...@example.com > 41 > > The reason is that each ' terminates the quoted string before it. If > you want embedded quotes, you either have to escape them (which is > annoying) or you have to use a different kind of quote for the > embedded version. For example, this would work: > > score '~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com"' 41 > > The difference is that mutt's parser will see that as the following > strings: > > score > ~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com" > 41 > > If you had replaced ALL single quotes with double quotes, e.g.: > > score "~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com"" 41 > > That would get parsed the exact same way as having all of the quotes > be single quotes. The key is *mixing* the quotes. You could also use > double-quotes for the outside string, and it would still work, like > so: > > score "~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com'" 41 > > Here's what I mean by escaping quotes: > > score "~h \"^Envelope-to: u...@example.com\"" 41 > > That way you're telling mutt which quotes should be considered to end > the string and which are instead *part* of the string. When they're > read, the backslashes get stripped off, so mutt sees that line like > this: > > score > ~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com" > 41 > > Does that make sense? > Well it would make sense if any of your examples worked, but unfortunately they don't. I've tried mixing " and ' myself, except for the escaping-quotes-trick. That's new, but gives me an error message as well.
Re: envelope-to and scoring
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 4 at 05:01 PM, quoth ssiza...@gmail.com: > ~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com' > >works when I'm limiting messages once inside the folder, but > >score '~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com'' 41 > >in my .muttrc doesn't. Obviously. It gets parsed as the strings: score ~h ^Envelope-to: u...@example.com 41 The reason is that each ' terminates the quoted string before it. If you want embedded quotes, you either have to escape them (which is annoying) or you have to use a different kind of quote for the embedded version. For example, this would work: score '~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com"' 41 The difference is that mutt's parser will see that as the following strings: score ~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com" 41 If you had replaced ALL single quotes with double quotes, e.g.: score "~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com"" 41 That would get parsed the exact same way as having all of the quotes be single quotes. The key is *mixing* the quotes. You could also use double-quotes for the outside string, and it would still work, like so: score "~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com'" 41 Here's what I mean by escaping quotes: score "~h \"^Envelope-to: u...@example.com\"" 41 That way you're telling mutt which quotes should be considered to end the string and which are instead *part* of the string. When they're read, the backslashes get stripped off, so mutt sees that line like this: score ~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com" 41 Does that make sense? ~Kyle - -- University politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so small. -- Henry Kissinger -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iEYEARECAAYFAkmuqdMACgkQBkIOoMqOI16PmgCfVYPBOHu6csh/Cwtgrg/k5BfJ g84AoJywxgHQFZ+FUxdA7suR6oYYNW+C =feZJ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: envelope-to and scoring
* ssiza...@gmail.com [20090304 17:02]: [snip] > > ~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com' > > works when I'm limiting messages once inside the folder, but > > score '~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com'' 41 > > in my .muttrc doesn't. Mutt complains about errors. I've tried > replacing ' with " besides removing it completely, putting \ in front > of my dots and removing everything but the domain name. But I still > get errors. score '~h "^Envelope-to: u...@example.com"' 41 That ought to work, but do read the manual on scoring. Not everything (as in patterns) works and I have a vague recollection that ~h is one of the things that don't work with scoring, same as matching on what is in the body of a message. -- Anders Rayner-Karlsson All-Round Linux Tinkerer, RHCE and PITA DeLuxe
Re: envelope-to and scoring
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 15:14, Ed Blackman wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 02:35:16PM +0100, ssiza...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> I'm currently trying to set up a scoring policy for mail sent to >> u...@example.com. >> >> The problem is, I only get mass-mailings to this adress, with >> u...@example.com usually residing in the BCC. But the header contains >> envelope-to: u...@example.com, I just don't get how to access this >> information. >> >> I tried ~L ~t ~C and whatnot. > > ~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com' > > Adjustments may be necessary if your mailer adds something other than a bare > email address to the Envelope-to line. > ~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com' works when I'm limiting messages once inside the folder, but score '~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com'' 41 in my .muttrc doesn't. Mutt complains about errors. I've tried replacing ' with " besides removing it completely, putting \ in front of my dots and removing everything but the domain name. But I still get errors.
Re: envelope-to and scoring
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 02:35:16PM +0100, ssiza...@gmail.com wrote: I'm currently trying to set up a scoring policy for mail sent to u...@example.com. The problem is, I only get mass-mailings to this adress, with u...@example.com usually residing in the BCC. But the header contains envelope-to: u...@example.com, I just don't get how to access this information. I tried ~L ~t ~C and whatnot. ~h '^Envelope-to: u...@example.com' Adjustments may be necessary if your mailer adds something other than a bare email address to the Envelope-to line. Ed signature.txt Description: Digital signature
envelope-to and scoring
I'm currently trying to set up a scoring policy for mail sent to u...@example.com. The problem is, I only get mass-mailings to this adress, with u...@example.com usually residing in the BCC. But the header contains envelope-to: u...@example.com, I just don't get how to access this information. I tried ~L ~t ~C and whatnot.
Re: Scoring
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Alexandre wrote: [snip (16 lines)] > i have that in ~/.muttrc, maybe you could try it: [snip (54 lines)] Thanks for the help. I will have a play with my muttrc. Regards, Chris. -- oOoOo "I'd go over twelve percent for that..." - Nice Guy Eddie, oOoOo oOoOo RESERVOIR DOGS oOoOo oOoOo oOoOo -- This message was scanned by ESVA and is believed to be clean.
Re: Scoring
Le vendredi 13 février de l'année 2009, vers 22 heures et 10 minutes, Chris
Willard écrivait:
> Hello All,
>
> Can someone please explain how scoring works for a beginner? I belong
> to a few mailing lists and some of them have quite a lot of messages.
>
> As I understand it I can use scoring to filter the messages but I am
> not sure of how to do this and how scoring works!
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Regards,
>
Hi,
i have that in ~/.muttrc, maybe you could try it:
# to sort mails according score
folder-hook . set sort_aux=score
# best score for my family...
score "~f fam...@family.org" 10
#more examples:
# Add a point to GPG signed messages
score "~g" 1
## Add a point to GPG encrypted messages
score "~G" 1
## Add a point to Flagged messages
score "~F" 1
## Add a point to messages from a known mailing list-
## * Use the, `subscribe' and `lists' command to tell mutt about lists
score "~l" 1
## Add a point to old (unread) messages
score "~O" 1
## Add a point to messages addressed to you-
score "~p" 1
## Add a point to messages from you
score "~P" 1
## Add a point to messages you replied to (using mutt)
score "~Q" 1
## Add a point to read messages
score "~R" 1
## Add a point to messages less than 80,000 bytes-
score "~z 0-8" 1
#If you want to see scoring in messages:
set index_format="%4C %2N %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15F %s"
Alexandre
--
---()()()()()()()()()--)()()()()()()()()(---
-()()--()-()-()()--)()(-)(-)(--)()(-
()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()(
Scoring
Hello All, Can someone please explain how scoring works for a beginner? I belong to a few mailing lists and some of them have quite a lot of messages. As I understand it I can use scoring to filter the messages but I am not sure of how to do this and how scoring works! Any help would be appreciated. Regards, Chris -- Chris [ ch...@thewillards.co.uk ] *\ "I'll wrap that car around your \** ** ]-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-[ **\ head." -- Uberman \* ** [ Htag.pl 0.0.23 ] ***\\ -- This message was scanned by ESVA and is believed to be clean.
Re: case-insensitive scoring patterns
Hi, * Sven Guckes [02-10-07 19:45:05 +0200] wrote: > * Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-07 13:14]: > >score '(~s \[?mutt\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 > "~w"? using some patches, i presume? nntp? vvv.nntp, yes. > besides, as the square brackets are optional you > might as well leave them out. so how about these? > score '~s mutt ~w $newsgroup' +100 > score "~s mutt ~w $newsgroup" +100 Hmm, please don't ask why I didn't do it this way but put the brackets in. Thanks for help. * Michael Elkins [02-10-07 21:45:06 +0200] wrote: > Rocco Rutte wrote: > I think your quoting is the problem. Try this one instead: > score '(~s \\[?mutt\\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 When thinking about my problem I knew there was something special about mutt I couldn't recall in that moment. Mutt removes the first level of backslashes when parsing rc files, I know. Shame on me. Thanks for help, too. But I have another question. I had some problems using a scoring rule like: score '~w ... (~s ... | ~s ...)' while: score '(~s ... | ~s ...) ~w ...' works as expected. Since there's no special AND operator (...meaning that no operator stands for AND) I think the order shouldn't matter at all but as it seems it does. Any thoughts? bye, Rocco
Re: case-insensitive scoring patterns
Rocco Rutte wrote: > Hmm, I thought so, too, and tried it before I asked the list > for help because I doesn't work. I use: > >score '(~s \[?[Mm][Uu][Tt][Tt]\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 > > ...which works as intended while: > >score '(~s \[?mutt\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 > > ...is applied to all messages and doesn't work. I think your quoting is the problem. Try this one instead: score '(~s \\[?mutt\\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 That will make the regexp on the subject come out to \[?mutt\]? instead of [?mutt]? which means something else quite entirely.
Re: case-insensitive scoring patterns
* Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-07 13:14]: >score '(~s \[?[Mm][Uu][Tt][Tt]\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 > ...which works as intended while: > >score '(~s \[?mutt\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 > > ...is applied to all messages and doesn't work. "~w"? using some patches, i presume? nntp? besides, as the square brackets are optional you might as well leave them out. so how about these? score '~s mutt ~w $newsgroup' +100 score "~s mutt ~w $newsgroup" +100 Sven
Re: case-insensitive scoring patterns
Hi, * Michael Elkins [02-10-05 23:15:05 +0200] wrote: > Rocco Rutte wrote: [...] > > score '~s \[?[Mm][Uu][Tt][Tt]\]?' ... > If you specify all lowercase letters, Mutt will > automatically use a case-insensitive search. If you use > at least one uppercase letter, Mutt assumes case-sensitive > search. This works for all use of the pattern language. Hmm, I thought so, too, and tried it before I asked the list for help because I doesn't work. I use: score '(~s \[?[Mm][Uu][Tt][Tt]\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 ...which works as intended while: score '(~s \[?mutt\]? ) ~w $newsgroup' +100 ...is applied to all messages and doesn't work. bye, Rocco
Re: Scoring in collapsed threads - flag and score sum
* Christian Garbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-05 19:41]: > Is there a way to show the score of hidden messages in > a [collapsed] thread (perhaps by setting the score of > the root message to the sum of all hidden messages)? no. > Or can I flag the whole thread when a > single message in the thread is flagged? no. but these are good ideas, of course. added to the wishlist. Sven -- Sven [EMAIL PROTECTED]| MUTT - a UNIX mailer with support for MUTT WOOF!,, Usenet: comp.mail.mutt | color+threading, IMAP,MIME+PGP+POP MUTT (__/'. http://www.mutt.org/ | Need a feature? Let me know! MUTT /| |\ http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/mutt/wish.php3 WishList!
Re: case-insensitive scoring patterns
* Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-05 20:52]: > see subject. this reference is almost always BAD. content changes - and subject should be adjusted to fit the contents. so subjects should not describe problems. > Is there any way to specify case-insensitive scoring patterns? > This is minor important but I'm too lazy to write filters like: > score '~s \[?[Mm][Uu][Tt][Tt]\]?' ... score '~s \[?mutt\]?' ... case-insensitivity is the default. Sven
Re: case-insensitive scoring patterns
Rocco Rutte wrote: > see subject. Is there any way to specify case-insensitive > scoring patterns? This is minor important but I'm too lazy > to write filters like: > > score '~s \[?[Mm][Uu][Tt][Tt]\]?' ... If you specify all lowercase letters, Mutt will automatically use a case-insensitive search. If you use at least one uppercase letter, Mutt assumes case-sensitive search. This works for all use of the pattern language.
case-insensitive scoring patterns
Hi, see subject. Is there any way to specify case-insensitive scoring patterns? This is minor important but I'm too lazy to write filters like: score '~s \[?[Mm][Uu][Tt][Tt]\]?' ... bye, Rocco
Scoring in collapsed threads
Hi there! I've recently started to use the scoring mechanisms of mutt. My mails are now colored depending on their score and some mails even get flagged automatically. I need the scoring for mailing lists. In my mailing list folders, I use scoring as well as threading. I like all threads to be collapsed when I enter the folder (otherwise it'd be a mess on lists with higher traffic). My problem: When a thread is collapsed, only the root message of a thread is visible and scored/colored/flagged. Is there a way to show the score of hidden messages in a thread (perhaps by setting the score of the root message to the sum of all hidden messages)? Or can I flag the whole thread when a single message in the thread is flagged? Regards, Christian PS: I like newsgroups better than mailing lists, but for some topics I have to subscribe to mailing lists. Now I try to make mutt behave like tin (my newsreader) because I got used to (and like) the way tin handles threads and scoring. I already thought about gating the mailing lists into local newsgroups, but I want to try to configure mutt the right way first. -- Christian.Garbs.http://www.cgarbs.de Windows CE (Chrash Everywhere)
Re: Scoring questions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Champion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jussi Ekholm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [I Cc'd this message to mutt-users, too - I think this belongs there >> instead of mutt-dev] > > Maybe, but it's also a request for someone to further develop the > documentation. :) Yeah, you're right. Well, now it goes for both lists and hopefully it'll raise some questions and other people would join the discussion, as well. >> Anyway, what if I want Mutt to sort all mailing list folders first by >> thread, then by date (most recent last) and finally by score; like >> Slrn does for me at the moment. Could someone who uses scoring show >> me some examples of how you sort the folders? > > I don't believe you can, until Daniel's latest threading patches make > it into 1.5.n, n>=2. The new patches will isolate threading from > sorting, so that you enable or disable threads but still have two sort > parameters. Oh, really? I can't wait to get my hands on that patch! Keep me posted and let me know when it comes out, if I'm too blind to see. :-) >> I'm quite sure. Or if it couldn't be used, my knowledge about >> 'scoring' (which comes from using Slrn) is very narrow and I simply >> don't understand how scoring is effectively and powerfully applied in >> Mutt... > > No, the "~n" pattern operator evaluates scores. You can color, limit, > search, etc. based on scores. E.g.: Yeah, well - actually I had doubt in my mind when I wrote the above, and unfortunately now my doubts got proven true. What's the real point in Mutt's scoring then, if it cannot be used to sort mails? Yes, I do realize that coloring, limiting and searching by score makes some things easier but still I can't say that I'd think Mutt's scoring would be very effective. So, I'm still not going to set up a score file; after I can take a look at Daniel's patch things can change. > But I don't know a lot. I don't use scoring, because I find that I have > to use it consistently for all my mail to make it useful for any of my > mail. I don't use scoring either, as I mentioned. But in Slrn, I really couldn't manage without scoring anymore. It just makes reading news helluva lot easier, as I can first check the "important" stuff and the stuff I really don't wanna see is already marked read, thus I can read them if I want to, but often I just let them go. Waiting for the threading patch with score as sort parameter!-) - -- Jussi Ekholm -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://erppimaa.ihku.org/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9S6mbAtEARxQQCB4RAm4HAKDADLxVjsU1414gNiZEWn9t5chKVQCeNhKu kbcL+v9r4OTOodD9mlxhAzo= =XccA -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Scoring questions
* On 2002.08.02, in <20020802115532.GC12347@erpland>,
* "Jussi Ekholm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [I Cc'd this message to mutt-users, too - I think this belongs there
> instead of mutt-dev]
Maybe, but it's also a request for someone to further develop the
documentation. :)
> Anyway, what if I want Mutt to sort all mailing list folders first by
> thread, then by date (most recent last) and finally by score; like Slrn
> does for me at the moment. Could someone who uses scoring show me some
> examples of how you sort the folders?
I don't believe you can, until Daniel's latest threading patches make
it into 1.5.n, n>=2. The new patches will isolate threading from
sorting, so that you enable or disable threads but still have two sort
parameters.
> This interests me greatly, as well.
>
> > Can scoring only be used in sorting?
>
> I'm quite sure. Or if it couldn't be used, my knowledge about 'scoring'
> (which comes from using Slrn) is very narrow and I simply don't
> understand how scoring is effectively and powerfully applied in Mutt...
No, the "~n" pattern operator evaluates scores. You can color, limit,
search, etc. based on scores. E.g.:
macro index ! "~n 500-" \
"Show only the really important stuff"
But I don't know a lot. I don't use scoring, because I find that I have
to use it consistently for all my mail to make it useful for any of my
mail.
--
-D.Fresh fruit enriches everyone. Takes the thirst
Sun Project, APC/UCCO out of everyday time. A pure whiff of oxygen,
University of Chicago painting over a monochrome world in primary colors.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] We all know that. It's why everyone loves fruit.
Re: Scoring questions
Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [I Cc'd this message to mutt-users, too - I think this belongs there instead of mutt-dev] > I think the documentation about scoring is quite lacking. I could somewhat agree; I've never been able to fully understand how mails could be sorted first by threads and then by score. Perhaps this would do it: folder-hook . set sort=threads folder-hook . set sort_aux=score Yes, I know you didn't ask this question - I'm just trying to find answers for myself too. :-) Anyway, what if I want Mutt to sort all mailing list folders first by thread, then by date (most recent last) and finally by score; like Slrn does for me at the moment. Could someone who uses scoring show me some examples of how you sort the folders? > One of the few links I found is > > http://www.linuxworld.com/site-stories/2001/1107.mutt2.html This link actually contained pretty nice information. Not very thorough, but it was helpful. I agree with you, that the documentation about scoring in Mutt could be more thorough. I've never got the hang of how to create effective scoring system in Mutt and make it sort the mails accordingly, either. > How can I determine/view a message's score value? You can add %N to your index_format. > How exactly are messages "flagged" if the threshold is reached? This interests me greatly, as well. > Can scoring only be used in sorting? I'm quite sure. Or if it couldn't be used, my knowledge about 'scoring' (which comes from using Slrn) is very narrow and I simply don't understand how scoring is effectively and powerfully applied in Mutt... Try setting some folder-hooks similar to the ones I wrote above. I think score can be given as argument to ``set sort=''. > And finally, why are negative final scores rounded up to 0? Umm, sorry - didn't quite get what you mean... > Advanced: how would I go about assign a score proportional to the number > of asterisks in SpamAssassin's X-Spam-Level: header? Is this possible > at all? Sounds a bit complicated, but I wouldn't be surprised if it would be possible. But honestly, I don't know. I haven't had the need to use these values, because all I care is ``X-Spam-Flag: Yes''. Any input and information about effective scoring is highly appreciated. It's one of the things in Mutt I've never really get hang of. -- Jussi Ekholm -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://erppimaa.ihku.org/ msg30089/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: scoring
> X-Mailer: Mutt-1.3.27i (Debian Linux 2.4.16, i686) > User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Aha, still suffering from schizophrenia! ;) > Hey people. Hi Michael, > Is there a way to use scoring as a primary sort method but still have > threading take effect? I tried putting threads as an aux sort, but it just > sort of groups them together, it doesn't thread them. I think what you need is the new threading patch from Daniel Eisenbud. It is for the unstable branch. Have a look at the mutt-dev archives, last month. -- Cedric
scoring
Hey people. Is there a way to use scoring as a primary sort method but still have threading take effect? I tried putting threads as an aux sort, but it just sort of groups them together, it doesn't thread them. Thanks, Mike -- Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, GnuPG pub key: 5BC8BE08 "...the word HACK is used as a verb to indicate a massive amount of nerd-like effort." -Harley Hahn, A Student's Guide to Unix msg28557/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Scoring known addresses
On 2002.03.05, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jeremy Blosser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 28, Volker Moell [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > Is there a posibillity to score all known mail addresses (i.e. all > > addresses defined in aliases) in one single score statement? > > David Champion has a patch for this... you can find a link to it from > www.mutt.org in the user patches section. Yes, it's a modifier to the regular ~f, ~t, ~C, ~L, etc. patterns. @~f . messages from any known alias @~t . messages to any known alias @~C . messages to or cc any known alias @~L uchicago.edumessages to or from any alias in uchicago.edu :) etc. http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/mutt/#isalias -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Re: Scoring known addresses
On Feb 28, Volker Moell [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Is there a posibillity to score all known mail addresses (i.e. all > addresses defined in aliases) in one single score statement? David Champion has a patch for this... you can find a link to it from www.mutt.org in the user patches section. msg25105/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Scoring known addresses
Hi, all! Is there a posibillity to score all known mail addresses (i.e. all addresses defined in aliases) in one single score statement? I only found then ~l for all messages addressed to a known mailing list: score ~l +100 Greetings, -volker -- http://die-Moells.de/ * http://Stama90.de/ * http://ScriptDale.de/ Qnf vfg qre Orjrvf, qnff Fvtf arhtvrevt znpura.
Using scoring to delete old mailing list messages
I configured mutt to automatically delete messages from mailing lists that are older than 21 days, provided that the message is not flagged or addressed to me. Here's what I came up with, in case it's useful to anyone else: my_hdr From: Philip Mak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> # alternate e-mail addresses set alternates=pmak@animeglobe\.com|pmak@animelyrics\.com|pmak@trapezoid\.interserver\.net set score # set scoring on score ~A 5000 # default score is 5000 set score_threshold_delete=0 # Delete messages with score = 0 score ~F +1000 # Increase score of flagged messages score ~p +1000 # Increase score of messages addressed directly to me # Decrease score of messages from mailing lists older than 21 days score "~e [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~r >21d" -5000 score "~e [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~r >21d" -5000 score "~e [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~r >21d" -5000 score "~e [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~r >21d" -5000 score "~C vim@vim\.org ~r >21d" -5000 score "~C mysql@lists\.mysql\.com ~r >21d" -5000 score "~C online-ads@o-a\.com ~r >21d" -5000
Re: killing and scoring
* David Champion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2002-02-13 14:11 -0500: > On 2002.02.13, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "Andre Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > My setup (below) tells procmail to source the addresses in > > ~/.procmail/spam, and add the message to my spam/ Maildir: > > Looks like you have a file (~/.procmail/spam) containing e-mail > addresses of people you want to block. So... Right > > Now, couldn't I extend the macro somehow to also add the sender to > > ~/.mutt.score, like > > > > score '~f [EMAIL PROTECTED]' - > > ^^^sender > > > > at the same time the address is added to ~/.procmail/spam? > > ... I'd create a script like this: > $ cat muttscore.sh > #!/bin/sh > cat $HOME/.procmail/spam | while read addr; do > echo "score '~f $addr' -" > done > > ... and source that from your muttrc: > source "muttscore.sh|" Perfect! Thank you very much -Andre msg24493/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: killing and scoring
On 2002.02.13, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Andre Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My setup (below) tells procmail to source the addresses in > ~/.procmail/spam, and add the message to my spam/ Maildir: Looks like you have a file (~/.procmail/spam) containing e-mail addresses of people you want to block. So... > Now, couldn't I extend the macro somehow to also add the sender to > ~/.mutt.score, like > > score '~f [EMAIL PROTECTED]' - > ^^^sender > > at the same time the address is added to ~/.procmail/spam? ... I'd create a script like this: $ cat muttscore.sh #!/bin/sh cat $HOME/.procmail/spam | while read addr; do echo "score '~f $addr' -" done ... and source that from your muttrc: source "muttscore.sh|" -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago Colons and slashes and dots, oh my!
killing and scoring
Hi, I've just re-subscribed to this list!
I would like to use the same keystroke to add senders to my
procmail killfile and score them to 0 in mutt.
My setup (below) tells procmail to source the addresses in
~/.procmail/spam, and add the message to my spam/ Maildir:
#~/.procmailrc
FROM=`formail -xFrom: | sed -e 's/ *(.*)//; s/>.*//; s/.*[:<] *//'`
:0
* ? fgrep -qxis "$FROM" $HOME/.procmail/spam
{
LOG="Spam from $FROM"
:0:
spam/
}
I add to the killfile using :
#~/.muttrc
macro index "|grep "^From:" | grep -v lists.debian | grep -v uzscd5 | grep -v
berger.150 | grep -v andre.berger | sed -e 's/ *(.*)//; s/>.*//; s/.*[:<] *//' >>
$HOME/.procmail/spam && echo Add sender to killfile\n;d\n" "kill sender"
macro pager "|grep "^From:" | grep -v lists.debian | grep -v uzscd5 | grep -v
berger.150 | grep -v andre.berger | sed -e 's/ *(.*)//; s/>.*//; s/.*[:<] *//' >>
$HOME/.procmail/spam && echo Add sender to killfile\n;d\n" "kill sender"
Now, couldn't I extend the macro somehow to also add the sender to
~/.mutt.score, like
score '~f [EMAIL PROTECTED]' -
^^^sender
at the same time the address is added to ~/.procmail/spam?
-Andre
msg24489/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: use of scoring
On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 04:56:16PM +0100, Johannes Segitz wrote:
> I would use it but mutts scoring abilities don't met my demands. I
> need something like the ability of slrn to create a scoring entries with
> one key (like "k" in slrn)
You could bind any key not bound to a function, yet to a macro which
does whatever you like.
--
Christian Ordig, Germany| Homepage: http://thor.prohosting.com/~chrordig/
open(IN,"distris.txt")||die("Keine Distris, Du Affe!");while(){chomp;
print "$_??? hätte ich was besseres erwartet!!! naja,was solls...\n";}
close(IN);
msg21625/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: use of scoring
On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 11:11:32PM -0500, Michael P. Soulier wrote: > Out of curiousity, how does everyone make use of message scoring? I would use it but mutts scoring abilities don't met my demands. I need something like the ability of slrn to create a scoring entries with one key (like "k" in slrn) Bye, Jonny -- "Why do people give each other flowers? To celebrate various important occasions, they're killing living creatures? Why restrict it to plants? 'Sweetheart, let's make up. Have this deceased squirrel.'" [Jerry Seinfeld] PGP/GPG-Key available at http://www.segitz.de msg21622/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: use of scoring
* On Fri Dec 14, Michael P. Soulier wrote: > Out of curiousity, how does everyone make use of message scoring? I don't know about others, but I use scoring in a very limited way. In my main folder, where I only put personal mail, I use this: score ~N 2 folder-hook "!" 'set sort=reverse-score; set sort_aux=date' folder-hook "!" 'push ' The effect of this is that the folder is sorted by date, but with unread (new) messages placed last. The second folder-hook makes sure that when I open this folder, the cursor is placed on the first unread mail. I'm sure there are more sophisticated ways to use scoring. Esp. for the recent filtering discussions in another thread. Jesper -- Jesper Holmberg|"But how can | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | one be warm | ENST Br, BP 832, 29285 Brest, FRANCE | alone?" |
use of scoring
Hey people. Out of curiousity, how does everyone make use of message scoring? Cheers, Mike -- Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, GnuPG pub key: 5BC8BE08 "...the word HACK is used as a verb to indicate a massive amount of nerd-like effort." -Harley Hahn, A Student's Guide to Unix msg21609/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Scoring by X-Priority
Josh Huber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It builds for me with this, but you'll have to test it yourself :) Maybe I should mention how to use it. just add: score_header "X-Priority" to your .muttrc, and the messages with this header will use the integer contents of said header as the inital score value for that message. Hope it works for you, -- Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Re: Scoring by X-Priority
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Patched 1.3.24i ok, but doesn't build. > Bombs out at this point: > > gcc -DPKGDATADIR=\"/usr/local/share/mutt\" -DSYSCONFDIR=\"/usr/local/etc\" >-DBINDIR=\"/usr/local/bin\" -DMUTTLOCALEDIR=\"/usr/local/share/locale\" >-DHAVE_CONFIG_H=1 -I. -I. -Iintl -I./intl -I/usr/local/include -Wall -pedantic -g >-O2 -c init.c > In file included from init.c:41: > init.h:1867: `ScoreHeader' undeclared here (not in a function) > init.h:1867: initializer element is not constant > init.h:1867: (near initialization for `MuttVars[171].data') > init.c: In function `mutt_init': > init.c:1844: warning: implicit declaration of function `getsid' > > I am not good at this stuff, so could my fault. > > Thanks anyway! Oops, sorry. That patch didn't have the whole set of changes in it. You'll also need the declaration of the variable: --- globals.h.orig Wed Dec 12 13:31:11 2001 +++ globals.h Wed Dec 12 13:31:14 2001 @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ WHERE short ScoreThresholdDelete; WHERE short ScoreThresholdRead; WHERE short ScoreThresholdFlag; +WHERE char *ScoreHeader; #ifdef USE_IMAP WHERE short ImapKeepalive; It builds for me with this, but you'll have to test it yourself :) -- Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Re: Scoring by X-Priority
Patched 1.3.24i ok, but doesn't build. Bombs out at this point: gcc -DPKGDATADIR=\"/usr/local/share/mutt\" -DSYSCONFDIR=\"/usr/local/etc\" -DBINDIR=\"/usr/local/bin\" -DMUTTLOCALEDIR=\"/usr/local/share/locale\" -DHAVE_CONFIG_H=1 -I. -I. -Iintl -I./intl -I/usr/local/include -Wall -pedantic -g -O2 -c init.c In file included from init.c:41: init.h:1867: `ScoreHeader' undeclared here (not in a function) init.h:1867: initializer element is not constant init.h:1867: (near initialization for `MuttVars[171].data') init.c: In function `mutt_init': init.c:1844: warning: implicit declaration of function `getsid' I am not good at this stuff, so could my fault. Thanks anyway! On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Josh Huber wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > Is there something else I can do to sort messages based on the > > header field that my filter is generating? > > Well, way back I wrote a small patch that adds support for a custom > scoring header to mutt. I'm sure it was messy, and it definately > slowed folder opening (was noticable for very large folders), but you > can take a look at this (which appears to still apply to 1.3.24!). Of > course, while it may still apply cleanly, you're on your own to test > it and make sure it works:
Re: Scoring by X-Priority
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Is there something else I can do to sort messages based on the
> header field that my filter is generating?
Well, way back I wrote a small patch that adds support for a custom
scoring header to mutt. I'm sure it was messy, and it definately
slowed folder opening (was noticable for very large folders), but you
can take a look at this (which appears to still apply to 1.3.24!). Of
course, while it may still apply cleanly, you're on your own to test
it and make sure it works:
diff -urN mutt-1.1.9/init.h mutt-1.1.9-extscore/init.h
--- mutt-1.1.9/init.h Wed Mar 29 21:56:12 2000
+++ mutt-1.1.9-extscore/init.h Tue Jan 11 06:21:08 2005
@@ -1663,6 +1663,15 @@
** $score_threshold_delete variable and friends are used.
**
*/
+ { "score_header", DT_STR, R_INDEX|R_RESORT_BOTH, UL &ScoreHeader, UL "" },
+ /*
+ ** .pp
+ ** When this variable is \fIset\fP, each message header will be examined
+ ** for a header in the form of ``score_header: ''. The integer
+ ** value that is found is used as an initial score value for the message.
+ ** This allows the use of external scoring (with procmail, for example)
+ ** while still taking advantage of Mutt's score sorting features
+ */
{ "score_threshold_delete", DT_NUM, R_NONE, UL &ScoreThresholdDelete, -1 },
/*
** .pp
diff -urN mutt-1.1.9/score.c mutt-1.1.9-extscore/score.c
--- mutt-1.1.9/score.c Fri Mar 3 05:10:14 2000
+++ mutt-1.1.9-extscore/score.c Tue Jan 11 06:21:13 2005
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
#include "sort.h"
#include
#include
+#include
typedef struct score_t
{
@@ -115,8 +116,46 @@
void mutt_score_message (CONTEXT *ctx, HEADER *hdr, int upd_ctx)
{
SCORE *tmp;
+ MESSAGE *msg;
+ FILE *fp = NULL;
+ HEADER *h = ctx->hdrs[hdr->msgno];
+ long lng = 0;
+ char *search = NULL;
+ char buf[STRING];
hdr->score = 0; /* in case of re-scoring */
+
+ /*
+ * If the score_header variable is set, then use
+ * that as an initial score value
+ */
+ if(ScoreHeader && *ScoreHeader) {
+if((msg = mx_open_message(ctx, hdr->msgno)) != NULL)
+{
+ fp = msg->fp;
+ fseek(fp, h->offset, 0);
+ lng = h->content->offset - h->offset;
+
+ /* now, search the headers... */
+ while(lng > 0) {
+if(fgets(buf, sizeof(buf) - 1, fp) == NULL)
+ break;
+
+search = strstr(buf, ScoreHeader);
+
+if(search) {
+ search = strstr(buf, ":");
+ hdr->score = atoi(search + 1);
+ break;
+}
+
+lng -= mutt_strlen(buf);
+ }
+
+ mx_close_message(&msg);
+}
+ }
+
for (tmp = Score; tmp; tmp = tmp->next)
{
if (mutt_pattern_exec (tmp->pat, 0, NULL, hdr) > 0)
--
Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Scoring by X-Priority
Hi, I am trying to get Mutt to work with a spam filter. The filter is run through procmail, and generates a custom header field: "X-Priority:" Now I am trying to make Mutt score based on that header field, but the manual has the following bit under the "Scoring" section: _begin (note: For efficiency reasons, patterns which scan information not available in the index, such as ~b, ~B or ~h, may not be used) _end Is there something else I can do to sort messages based on the header field that my filter is generating? Sincerely, Rob
Re: Scoring .. what is it's purpose
On 2001.09.09, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Cliff Sarginson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > - What is the purpose/use of "scoring" of mail messages? I'm sure that people use it in different ways, but fundamentally, it's just a ratings system. You can value/devalue messages according to the results of one or more matching operators, and then act on the message according to the sum of those ratings. You can look at it as a way of combining lots of different matching operations disjointly - rather than saying if (a and b and c) then mark as important if (a and b and d) then mark as junk if (a and b and e) then mark as ordinary ... plus many other combinations you can say if (a) then increase score by 25 if (b) then increase score by 25 if (c) then increase score by 50 if (d) then decrease score by 100 if (e) then decrease score by 5 if (score < 0) then mark as junk if (score >= 100) then mark as important You can use scoring to filter out suspected junk mail, or to prioritize messages from co-workers over those from friends, or to make messages from Outlook Express users disappear under a limit, all by tying rules together rather than by writing more complex rules. Another, simpler summary: it's a stateful property of a message that can be manipulated by any number of successive rules. > - Can i mark a message as undeletable (and reverse that) As far as I know, not without some severe shenanigans. You could bind your 'd' key to some function that deletes the message, then filters it to a program that evaluates the message's X-No-Delete: header, say, and copies it to a file if it's delete-locked, then appends that file to your current folder. Other bindings would insert/remove an X-No-Delete: header into/from the current message. That would do it, I think, but I'd reconsider how badly you want this functionality before trying it. Or ask someone for a patch. -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Scoring .. what is it's purpose
After a long time using mutt I am trying to understand more of it's features. - What is the purpose/use of "scoring" of mail messages? - Can i mark a message as undeletable (and reverse that) -- Regards Cliff
[SOT] scoring strategies
Not directly a technical question so Slightly OT; A wise man once said "real man score their email" Well poking around with scoring in mutt I would like to ask any "real man" what strategy do you use in scoring mail? give every incomming mail 50 points and then subtract or add points based on exclamation marks in the subject, pgp signed/encrypted or not, comming from a known address or not or give any message 100 points and then substract/add don't give any points and then add points for characteristics just curious. -- /guido Quid quid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. PGP signature
Re: Scoring 101
* John Buttery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2001-04-25 11:37 +0200: > OK, this is getting silly, so it's time to break down and ask for > some help. This isn't a question about mutt per se, but more of how > mutt parses its configuration files. This is the score command I have > right now that is generating an error: > > score ~s" " =0 > > The plain English translation of the above line is "Any message with > 3 consecutive spaces in it, score it zero". This is the error: I guess you'll have to mask the spaces, like "\ \ \ " (untested; consider mutt often needs more than one "\" in such cases). > Question #2: What is a message's default score, if no scoring matches > it? See the "score_*" variables in the manual. I use: set score_threshold_delete=0 set score_threshold_flag=30 # autoflag at 30 set score_threshold_read=15 unscore * score '~A' 20 # initial score value score '~P|~p|~Q' 20 # flag msg directly concerning myself score '!(~p|~P|~Q|~F)~d>7d' - # delete older than one week and #neither concerning myself nor flagged and so on. I hope this helps. Andre Berger[[EMAIL PROTECTED]] PGP signature
Scoring 101
OK, this is getting silly, so it's time to break down and ask for some help. This isn't a question about mutt per se, but more of how mutt parses its configuration files. This is the score command I have right now that is generating an error: score ~s" " =0 The plain English translation of the above line is "Any message with 3 consecutive spaces in it, score it zero". This is the error: Error in /home/john/.mutt/rc.score, line 3: missing parameter I can tell, in an abstract sense, what causes that error. However, I've tried all the following: score ~s" " =0 score ~s\" \" =0 score ~s' ' =0 score ~s\' \' =0 score ~s\ \ \ =0 All of the above either give me "too many parameters" or "missing parameter" errors. How can you specify this? Question #2: What is a message's default score, if no scoring matches it? Also, I'll let this be my every-3-months-or-so plea for the functionality "uncolor body" and "uncolor header". :) -- John Buttery The amount of intelligence in the universe is constant. Unfortunately, the population keeps increasing. Arthur C. Clarke (Web page temporarily unavailable) PGP signature
Scoring
I'm fairly new to mutt and don't understand how the scoring mechanism works. I can score my own address, say score '~f uzscd5@uni-bonn\.de' = But how do I set up the rest of the score file properly ? What's wrong with score '~f Benji\ Fisher' 500 score '~f gmxred@gmx\.net' =- score '~f [Tt]op[Ss]hop' = - score '~s [Nn]ews[Ll]etter | ~f [Nn]ews[Ll]etter' =- ? Maybe someone could correct me here... Andre Berger[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Re: Scoring addresses in lbdb
On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 03:14:03PM +0530, Abhay Ghaisas wrote: > I know that lbdb is a separate program and has no direct relation to mutt. > So, I think, one possible way it can be done is to add some kind of > scoring feature in lbdb and increase the score of selected addressed from > some macro magic from mutt every time I select an address. > > Any ideas? Not exactly an lbdb solution, but, why not simply turn it into a mutt alias instead? The results browser has a `create-alias' function (bound to "a" by default). -- Dave Pearson: | mutt.octet.filter - autoview octet-streams http://www.davep.org/ | mutt.vcard.filter - autoview simple vcards Mutt: | muttrc2html - muttrc -> HTML utility http://www.davep.org/mutt/ | muttrc.sl - Jed muttrc mode
Scoring addresses in lbdb
Hi, all. Is it somehow possible to score addresses I use in lbdb? Here is the problem I have. If I want to send a mail to somebody with name "Sudhir", I just type "sudhir" at the To: prompt and hit ^T for getting all possible completions. Invariably, I get a lot of completions that are possible. Many of them are just alternate addresses for the same "Sudhir" I want to contact. The preferred address is possibly sixth or seventh in the list. So, I scroll down and pick it up. What I want to happen now is that next time when I do the same operation, this address should get more priority and should be on top. I know that lbdb is a separate program and has no direct relation to mutt. So, I think, one possible way it can be done is to add some kind of scoring feature in lbdb and increase the score of selected addressed from some macro magic from mutt every time I select an address. Any ideas? Abhay. -- Abhay Ghaisas / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: scoring
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:40:55AM +0100 or thereabouts, Johannes Zellner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to do scoring in mutt (like in slrn) ?
> Would be useful for ML's with large bandwidth.
>
> --
>Johannes
6.3.60. index_format
Type: format string
Default: "%4C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"
%N message score
so,
set index_format="%4C %Z %N %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"
^^^
in .muttrc should give you the score in the index
--
Conor Daly
Met Eireann, Glasnevin Hill, Dublin 9, Ireland
Ph +353 1 8064217 Fax +353 1 8064275
Re: scoring
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 11:10:43AM +0100, Johannes Zellner wrote: > How do I set up colors for scores ? -- according to the > manual there's no color `object' for score. Do I have > to duplicate all score entries ? > > score '~C some@list\.org' 100 > color index yellow default '~C some@list\.org' You can set colors based on the score: . . . score '~C some@list\.org' 100 color index yellow default '~n 100-999' color index red default'~n 1000-' ttyl, -- Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 1024D/6B21489A 61F0 6138 BE7B FEBF A223 E9D1 BFE1 2065 6B21 489A PGP signature
Re: scoring
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 01:35:30PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Johannes Zellner proclaimed on mutt-users that: > > > ahh, yes. Thanks. Now: is it possible to /show/ the > > scores ? -- As far as I understand this, scoring is > > there will be different colors (see the sample.muttrc) How do I set up colors for scores ? -- according to the manual there's no color `object' for score. Do I have to duplicate all score entries ? score '~C some@list\.org' 100 color index yellow default '~C some@list\.org' -- Johannes
Re: scoring
Johannes Zellner proclaimed on mutt-users that: > ahh, yes. Thanks. Now: is it possible to /show/ the > scores ? -- As far as I understand this, scoring is there will be different colors (see the sample.muttrc) -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI Save gas, don't eat beans.
Re: scoring
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 10:42:52AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Johannes Zellner proclaimed on mutt-users that: > > > is it possible to do scoring in mutt (like in slrn) ? > > Would be useful for ML's with large bandwidth. > > yes > > from the sample.muttrc - [...] ahh, yes. Thanks. Now: is it possible to /show/ the scores ? -- As far as I understand this, scoring is just one of the sort methods. Now suppose I want to sort threaded, but want to have some marker (like the `!' in slrn) to show which messages have a high score. Is something like this possible ? -- Johannes
Re: scoring
Johannes Zellner proclaimed on mutt-users that: > is it possible to do scoring in mutt (like in slrn) ? > Would be useful for ML's with large bandwidth. yes from the sample.muttrc - unscore * # score # at that entry. If you prefix the score with an equal sign (=), the score #score '~f ^me@cs\.hmc\.edu$' 1000 #score '~t mutt | ~c mutt' =500 #score '~f aol\.com$' - -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI Avoid Quiet and Placid persons unless you are in Need of Sleep. -- National Lampoon, "Deteriorata"
scoring
Hi, is it possible to do scoring in mutt (like in slrn) ? Would be useful for ML's with large bandwidth. -- Johannes
Re: Scoring isn't working the way I expect
Darrin Mison proclaimed on mutt-users that: > I had problems getting procmail to work about 6months ago and gave up on it. > Does it require I particular style of email setup? I use mutt with getmail > and ssmtp. Nothing in particular - though I use it with sendmail 8.11.1 - where it plugs in out of the box RTFM at http://www.iki.fi/~era/procmail for more. -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI A figure with curves always offers a lot of interesting angles.
Re: Scoring isn't working the way I expect
I had problems getting procmail to work about 6months ago and gave up on it. Does it require I particular style of email setup? I use mutt with getmail and ssmtp. > > As you are running a unix box you can surely use procmail locally - or add > them to the access.db of _your_ workstation's sendmail, right? > -- Darrin Mison -- Auction: A gyp off the old block.
Re: Scoring isn't working the way I expect
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 04:52:01PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote: > > Your quoting is screwed up. Try > > score '~f terra.com.br' - > > instead. (Note that the last single quote character has moved.) > *laughs* No, that's just me not getting my cut-paste working so I did it by hand. Thanks anyway. Charles -- Charles Krug, Jr. Applications Engineer Pentek Corp 1 Park Way Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458
Re: Scoring isn't working the way I expect
Charles Krug proclaimed on mutt-users that: > Unfortunatly, not an option. Our email system was recently "improved" by > moving it from a Linux box to an NT box. I'm just happy that it hasn't been > further improved by moving it to Win2000. As you are running a unix box you can surely use procmail locally - or add them to the access.db of _your_ workstation's sendmail, right? Anyway most nt servers _do_ have spamfilters and such, afaik. -s (getting ot here - plz take this to news.admin.net-abuse.email) -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI There are new messages.
Re: Scoring isn't working the way I expect
On 2000-11-01 10:06:28 -0500, Charles Krug wrote: > score '~f terra.com.br -'# spambot ^ > Followed by: > score_threshold_delete=0 > However, I still get messages from terra.com.br. Am I > misunderstanding how this is supposed to work? My intent is to > killfile that entire domain, since it seems only to be a spambot. Your quoting is screwed up. Try score '~f terra.com.br' - instead. (Note that the last single quote character has moved.) -- Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Scoring isn't working the way I expect
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 08:49:47PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Charles Krug proclaimed on mutt-users that: > > > score ~A 1000 > > score '~f terra.com.br -'# spambot > > Followed by: > > score_threshold_delete=0 > > > However, I still get messages from terra.com.br. Am I misunderstanding how > > Block terra.com.br either at your mailserver or using procmail Unfortunatly, not an option. Our email system was recently "improved" by moving it from a Linux box to an NT box. I'm just happy that it hasn't been further improved by moving it to Win2000. In any event, I'm not in a position to make changes upstream of my own mailbox. Charles -- Charles Krug, Jr. Applications Engineer Pentek Corp 1 Park Way Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458
Re: Scoring isn't working the way I expect
Charles Krug proclaimed on mutt-users that: > score ~A 1000 > score '~f terra.com.br -'# spambot > Followed by: > score_threshold_delete=0 > However, I still get messages from terra.com.br. Am I misunderstanding how Block terra.com.br either at your mailserver or using procmail :0: ^From terra\.com\.br /dev/null In sendmail - access.db terra.com.brREJECT -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI In Seattle, Washington, it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon that is over six feet in length.
Scoring isn't working the way I expect
List: I've a number of lines in my .muttrc file like this: score ~A 1000 score '~f terra.com.br -'# spambot Followed by: score_threshold_delete=0 However, I still get messages from terra.com.br. Am I misunderstanding how this is supposed to work? My intent is to killfile that entire domain, since it seems only to be a spambot. Thanks Charles -- Charles Krug, Jr. Applications Engineer Pentek Corp 1 Park Way Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458
Re: scoring and aliases
Eric Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Fri, 05 May 2000: > how does one do scoring with aliases? Hmm, that's an interesting question, I've never heard of anyone ask how one can do that. The short answer is that it can't be done. The long answer is still that it can't be done, but it might be a useful addition... Perhaps a new (secondary?) pattern operator or something? Example: "~f ~a myalias" would match any email from "myalias", where "myalias" can be a single address or a list of aliases/addresses. Opinions? Mail-Followup-To directed to mutt-dev, because it's more on-topic there. 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 / Many people quit looking for work when they find a job.
scoring and aliases
So I'm fairly new to mutt, so I could certainly be on crack and have over looked the relevent documentation but how does one do scoring with aliases? I would like to think something like the following is possible: score '~f the_guys' 100 where the_guys is defined by: alias the_guys jon, wes, james, mike alias jon [EMAIL PROTECTED] alias wes [EMAIL PROTECTED] alias mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] alias james [EMAIL PROTECTED] but sadly it doesn't seem to be the case. I would think it wouldn't be to hard something like that to look up the aliases. But I can't see how one gets the score thing to take anything besides a pattern, and given a pattern how to look up aliases instead of regexs. If anyone has some thoughts on this subject I'd love to hear them. Thanks. peace, --e;
scoring: unflagging problem
I thought I'd try out scoring. Everything works fine until I decided to remove one of my scoring rules. I was expecting certain messages to become unflagged (since they do not receive a high enough score anymore), but alas, they stay flagged. Putting '%N' in the index_format though confirms that the score of those messages is now 0. Is there some command that needs to give to mutt to have all the messages explicitly rescored? -- Maciej Kalisiak | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.dgp.toronto.edu/~mac [McQ] PGP->finger|www; (0x39AC36F5) 9F BB 9E 11 F0 1E 5D 20 0B 31 3D 37 47 D0 67 C7 GE/CS d- s++:+ a- C++(+++) ULAI++ P+++ L+++ E+++ W++ N- o? K? !w--- O- M- V-- PS PE+ Y+ PGP+ t+ 5 !X-- R+ tv-- b+> DI+ G+ e>+++>(*) h--- r+++ y?
Re: Sorting, scoring and pattern-matching
Telsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Sat, 02 Oct 1999: > I gather checking the entire message body would be a very big job > and result in slowing things down. and > I'm not desperate to sort on message bodies I actually use l(imit) with a ~b pattern quite frequently to locate some messages from which I only remember part of the content (eg. "What was that URL again that I remember mailing to someone 3 months ago?"). Instead of using scoring, it would probably be possible to assign a specific limit command to a macro and use this as necessary on demand. That way entering folders is still quick and the time-consuming part of matching message bodies can be done when you want it, but not otherwise. Depending on the size of the mailbox, limit based on body text can take a long time. However, considering that those folders which do take awhile for me are rather huge (eg. 8MB and more, thousands of messages), I would think that using this limit on any sane-sized mail folder would be quite prompt. Machine speed is certainly a big factor, of course. 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 / command, n.: A suggestion made to a computer.
Re: Sorting, scoring and pattern-matching
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 09:38:17AM -0400 or thereabouts, Daniel Eisenbud wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 03:08:56PM +0300, Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> > Telsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Fri, 01 Oct 1999:
> > > I'm having some difficulties with the sorting by score ability of Mutt.
> >
> > Don't have any ideas on that, sorry... Unless Mutt does not support
> > every pattern match operator for scoring, only some. But that doesn't
> > sound likely or make any sense (what's different between looking at ~e
> > or ~h?).
>
> Mutt only supports some pattern operators for scoring. There's a
> reason, which I forget.
Someone else emailed me to say much the same thing, and said that
efficiency had had something to do with it, if they remembered right.
My immediate thought was "Well, which does it support?" and I spent
an entertaining evening resorting different folders according to
different criteria. I don't vouch for 100% accuracy for the whole
lot of these: but I can confidently assert that these worked for me:
~A (all), ~c (cc'd) ~C (to or cc'd), ~d (date) ~e (sender field), ~g
(PGP-signed) and ~N (new). That's as far through the alphabet as I
got before my brain melted.
A friend who understands C then told me that anything which has
M_FULL_MSG in the same line in the structure at the start of
pattern.c won't work. That happens to be the three I already
found definitely don't work: ~b, ~B and ~h. I also can't get
~l ("to a known mailing list") to work.
Perhaps it is worth adding a brief note to section 3.19 of the
manual to make it clear that those first three (or all four?)
aren't used for scoring?
I couldn't get ~k (contains PGP key material) to work on a message
containing my PGP key, although ~g worked to spot signed messages.
And ~I (message-ID, although why one would want to score by that
I'm not sure: I was just in a fit of trying things out at the time)
said, "I: invalid command".
> I had a discussion with Michael Elkins about
> this a long time ago. I think the conclusion was that scoring would
> have to be moved to a different pass than reading the messages for this
> to work. He didn't seem against the idea, IIRC, but I don't think
> anybody cared enough to actually do it.
I gather checking the entire message body would be a very big job
and result in slowing things down. I like mutt's speed, so I'm not
going to push this :)
Thanks for the enlightenment. At least I know it's not (all) due
to pattern-matching mistakes on my part now! I hope the partial
list of what does and doesn't work is (a) accurate, and (b) of
use to someone. I'm not desperate to sort on message bodies: or
at least not desperate enough to start reading the procmail pages
again, but I suppose that's one answer for anyone who is.
Telsa
Re: Sorting, scoring and pattern-matching
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 03:08:56PM +0300, Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Telsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Fri, 01 Oct 1999: > > I'm having some difficulties with the sorting by score ability of Mutt. > > Don't have any ideas on that, sorry... Unless Mutt does not support > every pattern match operator for scoring, only some. But that doesn't > sound likely or make any sense (what's different between looking at ~e > or ~h?). Mutt only supports some pattern operators for scoring. There's a reason, which I forget. I had a discussion with Michael Elkins about this a long time ago. I think the conclusion was that scoring would have to be moved to a different pass than reading the messages for this to work. He didn't seem against the idea, IIRC, but I don't think anybody cared enough to actually do it. -Daniel -- Daniel Eisenbud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sorting, scoring and pattern-matching
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 03:08:56PM +0300 or thereabouts, Mikko Hänninen wrote: (in a lightning-fast response) > Don't have any ideas on that, sorry... Unless Mutt does not support > every pattern match operator for scoring, only some. But that doesn't > sound likely or make any sense (what's different between looking at ~e > or ~h?). I honestly have no clue. I'm really perplexed by that. > > On a related note, how do I get my index_format for those folders > > to include the score? > > This I can probably help with. Indeed. Putting the whole thing inside ' quotes worked perfectly. Thanks a lot! Telsa
Re: Sorting, scoring and pattern-matching
Telsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Fri, 01 Oct 1999:
> I'm having some difficulties with the sorting by score ability of Mutt.
Don't have any ideas on that, sorry... Unless Mutt does not support
every pattern match operator for scoring, only some. But that doesn't
sound likely or make any sense (what's different between looking at ~e
or ~h?).
> On a related note, how do I get my index_format for those folders
> to include the score?
This I can probably help with.
> And I thought that this would work:
> folder-hook . set index_format="%4C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"
> folder-hook IN.cvs-commits set index_format="%2N %2C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"
The " quotes disappear the first time around (when the folder-hook
command is read), and this leaves a command such as
set index_format=%2N %2C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s
(without any quotes) to be executed on entering that folder. This
doesn't work of course, index_format requires that any spaces appear
inside a quoted string. Thus you need a double set of quotes.
So, these probably need to be:
folder-hook . 'set index_format="%4C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"'
folder-hook IN.cvs-commits 'set index_format="%2N %2C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"'
(note the added ' quotes, before set and at the end of line)
Hopeing someone else can help with the scoring issues,
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 /
Q: How many surrealists does it take to change a light bulb? A: Fish
Sorting, scoring and pattern-matching
I'm having some difficulties with the sorting by score ability of Mutt.
Occurs currently on Mutt 1.0pre3i on Linux 2.2.13pre9 and earlier on
0.95.5i, but I think it's my pattern-matching rather than a mutt
problem. I have read the manual, I have tried to understand the
O'Reilly "Regular Expressions" book, and I have looked for examples
in muttrcs on the web (only one used scoring, alas). I even grepped
the source directory for where the error message occurs, and although
I don't understand the code, the fact that it's from "pattern.c" is
a big hint, I should think :)
As I understand (or don't) sections 3.19 and 4.2 of the manual, and
from looking at the one muttrc linked off www.mutt.org which uses
scoring, the format is
Usage: score pattern value
And examples in http://sec.42.org/mutt/.mutt/muttrc-1.0pre3i.html have
the pattern as things like,
folder-hook . unscore *
folder-hook . score '~A' +50
folder-hook +Listen/freebsd-cvs "score '~F' +999"
folder-hook +Listen/freebsd-cvs "score '~s ports/ ! ~s ^Re: ! ~s Imported' -20"
Following that syntax, I have one folder in which I'm looking for anything
to do with documentation of a particular program where scoring works great:
folder-hook . set sort=threads
folder-hook IN.cvs-commits set sort=score
folder-hook IN.cvs-commits "score '~s gnome-terminal' 1"
folder-hook IN.cvs-commits "score '~s gnome-core' 1"
folder-hook IN.cvs-commits "score '~s desktop-docs' 1"
folder-hook IN.cvs-commits "score '~s gnome-libs' 1"
folder-hook IN.cvs.commits "score '~s zucchi' 1"
Anything with that lot goes up to the top, and I can read those and
cheerfully ignore the rest. (I realise there are probably ways to
do this in one line, but since I'm obviously messing up somewhere,
I'm keeping it in a state I can read for now.)
But I also wanted to add anything with words like "documentation",
"guide" and the like anywhere in the message body to go up there,
too. According to the manual, that's b or B.
When I try
folder-hook IN.cvs.commits "score '~b document' 1"
folder-hook IN.cvs.commits "score '~B document' 1"
I am told "b: not supported in this mode". "not supported in this
mode" is an error which occurs in pattern.c, which doesn't surprise me,
because I am dreadful at pattern-matching :) But I'm even more
dreadful at C, so I don't understand from looking at that little
bit of it what I'm doing wrong.
Whilst experimenting with a different folder, where lists called
both junk and junk-not go, when I erroneously put:
folder-hook IN.junk set sort=score
folder-hook IN.junk "score '~h junk-not' 1"
I got "h: not supported in this mode". I changed the ~h to a ~e
(probably what I want anyway, but messages from that source are so
rare that it's hard to test :)), and it now works. Or, at least,
it produces no error message.
However, section 4.2 for pattern-matching has precisely the same
format for each:
~e EXPR message which contains EXPR in the `Sender'' field
~h EXPR messages which contain EXPR in the message header
So - um? What's the difference? The use of a hyphen? I thought
perhaps it was that, but 4.1 only mentions hyphens as being special
when they're in square brackets.
Help? How do I set up something that looks for particular words
in a message and sorts on it?
On a related note, how do I get my index_format for those folders
to include the score? My default index_format is
set index_format="%4C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"
And I thought that this would work:
folder-hook . set index_format="%4C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"
folder-hook IN.cvs-commits set index_format="%2N %2C %Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%4l) %s"
But when I try this, it tells me that it doesn't understand %Z -- although
it shows it perfectly well for everything else.
Any clues on that?
I mentioned problems with scoring before, but had no response. I'm
hoping a clearer (well, clear-ish) explanation will help. :)
Telsa
Re: More powerful scoring in mutt.
On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 10:19:17AM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > > So ':score ~s foo ' should do what you want just fine. > >From manual.txt: Usage: score pattern value Should that be ':score "~s foo" ' ? Otherwise mutt reports "score: too many arguments" -- (T.) Michael Sanders internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Physics Department URL: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~sanders University of Michigan phone: 734/936-0799 Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1120 FAX: 734/764-6843
Re: More powerful scoring in mutt.
Quoth Jeremy Blosser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > It's not prompting you for the info, but anything you can stick in your > .muttrc can be done from a running mutt by doing : > > So ':score ~s foo ' should do what you want just fine. > Yes, but then what if you want to save the scores you've set in that session, as any given subject/person/whatever may be more or less interesting for months? Something effectively like :save-scores and/or a :set score-file JB, who hasn't really looked for this, but when he did, didn't find it.
Re: More powerful scoring in mutt.
Warning Could not process message with given Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=bjuZg6miEcdLYP6q; micalg=pgp-md5;protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Re: More powerful scoring in mutt.
On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 10:54:59PM -0900, Matt Armstrong wrote: > 2 - No way to show threads but still sort by score. In the threaded > display, gnus can sort first by thread, then by score. Maybe > something like: > > sort=thread,score set sort=treads set sort_aux=score seems to work for me :) CU, Sec -- CUSTOMER: "I'm running Windows '95." > TECH: "Yes." CUSTOMER: "My computer isn't working now." > TECH: "Yes, you already said that." -- (found in comp.os.linux.misc)
More powerful scoring in mutt.
For the past four years I've used Gnus under Emacs as my MUA. I got tired of the slowness and switched to mutt. I think mutt is awesome, but I miss one thing from Gnus: scoring. Mutt has the beginnings of it. I'll list what I miss and I solicit comments about how I might go about getting a similar effect in mutt. 1 - No UI for entering scores from within mutt. So, I'm reading along and I realize the thread I'm on has turned into a flame war. I want a convenient way to score that subject down without having to muck with my muttrc. In Gnus, I just type 'L' and it prompts me for the rest. 2 - No way to show threads but still sort by score. In the threaded display, gnus can sort first by thread, then by score. Maybe something like: sort=thread,score If there are easy ways to accomplish these things within mutt? If not, if I implemented these things, would they be accepted into mutt? Or would they be considered bloat.
Re: scoring
On 01/25/99 Daniel Eisenbud uttered the following other thing:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 03:47:12PM -0700, Phil Humpherys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >
> > Hmm. Small section.. it'd be nice if you could configure some
> > scoring on the fly...
>
> You can (":score ...") but of course then it doesn't get written out to
> your .muttrc. However, if you make a macro that calls a script that
> takes your input and appends it to .muttrc.score, then sources
> .muttrc.score, that would do it nicely (I think you'd need an unscore *
> at the beginning of said file...)
And yes, that's ugly. Something that a built in scripting language
might make quite a bit better, though (ie, you could set up macros for
"kill subject", "kill thread" or the like
Brandon
--
Brandon Long ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [http://www.fiction.net/blong/]
"my objection to the notion of God is that the idea lacks elegance."
-- Giles Bowkett
Re: scoring
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 03:47:12PM -0700, Phil Humpherys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Hmm. Small section.. it'd be nice if you could configure some
> scoring on the fly...
You can (":score ...") but of course then it doesn't get written out to
your .muttrc. However, if you make a macro that calls a script that
takes your input and appends it to .muttrc.score, then sources
.muttrc.score, that would do it nicely (I think you'd need an unscore *
at the beginning of said file...)
-Daniel
--
Daniel Eisenbud
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
