Sometimes when I reply to an email Evolution treats the original as a
single object and quotes it that way. This means any response text I
insert in it is automatically quoited making it look like part of the
sender's message. How do I stop this so my response line aren't prefixed
with '> '?
Ric
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 20:40 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
> Sometimes when I reply to an email Evolution treats the original as a
> single object and quotes it that way. This means any response text I
> insert in it is automatically quoited making it look like part of the
> sender's message. How do I s
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 21:22 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 20:40 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
> > Sometimes when I reply to an email Evolution treats the original as a
> > single object and quotes it that way. This means any response text I
> > insert in it is automatically
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 23:31 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 21:22 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 20:40 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
> > > Sometimes when I reply to an email Evolution treats the original as a
> > > single object and quotes it that way. Th
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 10:18 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote:
> Also, I seem to remember that the more recent Evo versions use a
> different editor, has that made a difference?
IIRC this is in line for 2.24, which I don't currently have.
> Is there any scope for an option to convert all replies to plain t
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 08:49 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > Is there any scope for an option to convert all replies to plain
> text
> > before editing rather than maintaining the HTML structure imposed by
> > less sophisticated email clients that other people use?
>
> That would be good but
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:13 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 08:49 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > Is there any scope for an option to convert all replies to plain
> > text
> > > before editing rather than maintaining the HTML structure imposed by
> > > less sophist
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:56 -0400, Reid.Thompson wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:13 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 08:49 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > Is there any scope for an option to convert all replies to plain
> > > text
> > > > before editing rather
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:54 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:56 -0400, Reid.Thompson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:13 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 08:49 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > > Is there any scope for an option to
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 10:40 -0400, Reid.Thompson wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:54 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:56 -0400, Reid.Thompson wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 09:13 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 08:49 -0430, Patrick
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 11:06 -0400, Reid.Thompson wrote:
> Setting $EDITOR to "gvim -f" results in invocation
> failure.
Have you tried writing a script that runs gvim -f, then using that
script as $EDITOR?
I can't recall whether it's generally considered "OK" for $EDITOR to
contain any arguments;
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 11:58 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 11:06 -0400, Reid.Thompson wrote:
> > Setting $EDITOR to "gvim -f" results in invocation
> > failure.
>
> Have you tried writing a script that runs gvim -f, then using that
> script as $EDITOR?
>
> I can't recall whether
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 12:21 -0400, Reid.Thompson wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 11:58 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 11:06 -0400, Reid.Thompson wrote:
> > > Setting $EDITOR to "gvim -f" results in invocation
> > > failure.
> >
> > Have you tried writing a script that runs gvim
Ok, two questions, why did Evolution pick the HTML version/part of the
message rather than the plain text version which precedes the section of
HTML in the source?
Second question is very basic, setting up $EDITOR, I'm running Ubuntu
7.10 and Evolution 2.12.1. Do I just set the Evolution launche
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 16:13 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
> Ok, two questions, why did Evolution pick the HTML version/part of the
> message rather than the plain text version which precedes the section of
> HTML in the source?
>
> Second question is very basic, setting up $EDITOR, I'm running Ubuntu
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 16:13 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
> Second question is very basic, setting up $EDITOR, I'm running Ubuntu
> 7.10 and Evolution 2.12.1. Do I just set the Evolution launcher icon
> to
> run a script setting up EDITOR='gvim -f $*' and then have it invoke
> Evolution?
sorry, just
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 16:13 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
> Second question is very basic, setting up $EDITOR, I'm running Ubuntu
> 7.10 and Evolution 2.12.1. Do I just set the Evolution launcher icon
> to run a script setting up EDITOR='gvim -f $*' and then have it invoke
> Evolution?
Unless I'm com
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 16:13 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
Second question is very basic, setting up $EDITOR, I'm running Ubuntu
7.10 and Evolution 2.12.1. Do I just set the Evolution launcher icon
to run a script setting up EDITOR='gvim -f $*' and then have it invoke
Evolu
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 22:47 -0400, Reid Thompson wrote:
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 16:13 -0400, Rick Berger wrote:
> >> Second question is very basic, setting up $EDITOR, I'm running Ubuntu
> >> 7.10 and Evolution 2.12.1. Do I just set the Evolution launcher icon
> >> to
19 matches
Mail list logo
