does gpg work in place of pgp for mutt use? how good is gpg? is it stable?
where do I find more info on it?
thanks,
--
brian kowolowski
[Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>
> How do I handle application/x-be_attribute in mutt? I'm using
> David Pearson's mutt.octet.filter, if that's important, and
> have no access to systems running BeOS.
An application/x-be_attribute contains all the attributes attached
to the previously enc
are key bindings in mutt for the pager and index separate? can I bind r in
the index to reply to the current message, and bind r in the pager to reply
to the current message?
thanks,
--
brian kowolowski
++ 12.03.1999, 17:45:14 (+0100) = [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>I most times see pgp signed messages as an attachment in mutt, though others
>I see the signatures in the body of the messages. Why and how's this
>difference? How can one and another been achieved?
This is because the PGP signature is a par
On Fri, Mar 12, 1999 at 10:19:45AM +0100, Rejo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm using Mutt with support for PGP. As i'm subbed to several lists i
> sometimes see a posting with a signature of my own. Mutt tells me there
> was a 'Good signature', but also says 'This signature applies to another
> message'.
Warning
Could not process message with given Content-Type:
multipart/signed; boundary=nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j; micalg=pgp-md5;protocol="application/pgp-signature"
On 03/12/99 Ken W uttered the following other thing:
> Hi, I am trying to patch mutt on a new system witht he same patches I
> have always used on BSD systems, but this system is Solaris. When I
> run 'patch < ' I get the following:
>
> The next patch looks like a unified context diff.
> The
Hi Ken,
I don't have a solution, but I have experienced the same thing on
solaris 7 while patching to 0.95.3us. The problem seems to be that my
source code and the patch do not agree on the line number. It was off by
more than 5.
Also, the solaris patch doesn't seem to recognize multiple patches
Twas brillig, on Fri Mar 12 at 02:54:51 PM, and rfi from Rich Roth burbled:
> On Fri, Mar 12, 1999 at 11:37:11AM -0800, Brandon Long wrote:
>
> > > text/enriched; /home/binde/bin/rtfreader %s; copiousoutput
>
> ...
>
> > rtfreader program I know about actually reads application/ms-rtf or
Hi, I am trying to patch mutt on a new system witht he same patches I
have always used on BSD systems, but this system is Solaris. When I
run 'patch < ' I get the following:
The next patch looks like a unified context diff.
The next patch looks like a unified context diff.
The next patch l
Warning
Could not process message with given Content-Type:
multipart/signed; boundary=uxuisgdDHaNETlh8; micalg=pgp-sha1;protocol="application/pgp-signature"
On Fri, Mar 12, 1999 at 11:37:11AM -0800, Brandon Long wrote:
> > text/enriched; /home/binde/bin/rtfreader %s; copiousoutput
...
> rtfreader program I know about actually reads application/ms-rtf or the
Do you have a location for this program ??
--
Later ...
Rich Roth --- On-the-Net
D
On 03/12/99 Melissa D. Binde uttered the following other thing:
> Twas brillig, on Fri Mar 12 at 06:55:29 PM, and Eric Smith burbled:
>
> > some1 posted an interesting viewing facility for html with lynx
> > Made me think of this for all those legacy file formats that ppl keep
> > mailing like m$
On 03/12/99 David DeSimone uttered the following other thing:
> Daniel Brahneborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > So, what is the syntax for imap subfolders?
>
> {server.name}subfolder_name
And if you want to see IMAP work much better, I suggest joining mutt-dev
and getting the latest dev
Daniel Brahneborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, what is the syntax for imap subfolders?
{server.name}subfolder_name
--
David DeSimone | "The doctrine of human equality reposes on this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | that there is no man really clever who has not
Hewlett-Packard | found tha
Vikas Agnihotri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you are using a non-standard ispell which does NOT accept '-x', you
> can always 'set ispell=/path/to/ispell' in your muttrc.
No you can't, because it's hard-coded in the source.
--
David DeSimone | "The doctrine of human equality reposes on t
Twas brillig, on Fri Mar 12 at 06:55:29 PM, and Eric Smith burbled:
> some1 posted an interesting viewing facility for html with lynx
> Made me think of this for all those legacy file formats that ppl keep
> mailing like m$ .doc files.
>
> for your .mailcap
> application/octet-stream; strings %s
Hi,
I most times see pgp signed messages as an attachment in mutt, though others
I see the signatures in the body of the messages. Why and how's this
difference? How can one and another been achieved?
Also, could anyone send to me the variables that need to be added for mutt-i
to work with pgp
some1 posted an interesting viewing facility for html with lynx
Made me think of this for all those legacy file formats that ppl keep
mailing like m$ .doc files.
for your .mailcap
application/octet-stream; strings %s ;copiousoutput
and for you .muttrc
auto_view application/octet-stream
I tried t
Hi all,
I'm trying to use Mutt with an IMAP server, and it's not working quite
as well as I'd want it to. Mutt can use the default Inbox very nicely,
but I can't get it to open any of the subfolders I have. Using Netscape
Messenger with the same IMAP server works fine, so it's not a server
prob
Hi.
I encountered a problem with ispell handling of mutt. Ispell is
called with -x flag (compose.c).
-x Don't create a backup file.
However, if you use an ispell which deletes backup files by
default you don't have this flag anymore - and makes this ispell
unusable :-(.
Wouldn't it
Hi.
I encountered a problem with ispell handling of mutt. Ispell is
called with -x flag (compose.c).
-x Don't create a backup file.
However, if you use an ispell which deletes backup files by
default you don't have this flag anymore - and makes this ispell
unusable :-(.
Wouldn't it
How do I handle application/x-be_attribute in mutt? I'm using
David Pearson's mutt.octet.filter, if that's important, and
have no access to systems running BeOS.
Hello,
I'm using Mutt with support for PGP. As i'm subbed to several lists i
sometimes see a posting with a signature of my own. Mutt tells me there
was a 'Good signature', but also says 'This signature applies to another
message'. What does imply this last line?
Also, when vieuwing the signatur
On Thu, Mar 11, 1999 at 20:38:23 -0800, David Ellement wrote:
> On 990310, at 18:38:14, Byrial Jensen wrote:
> > All 3 things should be fixed in the attached patch.
BTW someone told me that all 3 things aren't bugs, but intentional
(and undodumented!) features. It may be so, but then I prefer to
25 matches
Mail list logo
