Nick Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked:
> Anyone got the equivelant Procmail recipe for dumping mail if
> it's text/html ot not addressed to you? I use this to get the
> latter:
>
> :0:
> * !(^[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> ~/Mail/Other/suspect
>
> Which works fine, adding the ability to weed out html woul
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote parv thusly...
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> wrote Nicolas Rachinsky thusly...
> >
> > * "Justin R. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> > > Without conditional checking (which is lacking in Mutt), I
> > > don't know of a way around this...
> >
> ...while adding other problems:
>
Apologies for not getting back to the list with requested specs. My hard
drive died and I've spent the last day or so getting things back to
normal (whatever that is..) I haven't solved the X problem yet but I'm
close. Thomas I followed your advice about inser
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote Nicolas Rachinsky thusly...
>
> * On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 03:25:32PM -0500,
> * "Justin R. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Thus spake parv ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > >
> > > problem is when no "~N~P" messages are found, fails.
> > > then regardless
Hi,
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002 Jeremy Blosser spewed into the ether:
> On Jan 28, Nicholas A. Martini [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > does anyone know how to make mutt show messages from yoursef (or another
> > address) show up as read, or not new, or something? it would be handy
> > for high-volume list
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002, Daniel Eisenbud wrote:
> But I don't know. If what you mean is that the second picture is what
> it looks like in 1.3.27, could you please send me a small test mailbox
> demonstrating this?
I will when I see it again. Very odd behavior.
-Ken
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
> > Mh... I trusted you on that patch, and didn't observe any adverse
> > effects myself. ;-)
>
> Actually, after further review, this appears to be a bug dating all the way
> back at least as far as mutt 1.2.5.
>
> Try opening an xterm with the command
> Mh... I trusted you on that patch, and didn't observe any adverse
> effects myself. ;-)
Actually, after further review, this appears to be a bug dating all the way
back at least as far as mutt 1.2.5.
Try opening an xterm with the command "xterm -bg grey -fg black" and then
run "mutt -n -F
On Tue Jan 29, 2002 at 02:05:45PM -0800, Michael Elkins wrote:
> Yes, replace the %L with %F or %n to suit your tastes.
Just what I wanted. Thanks.
--
Martin Karlsson
On 2002-01-29 13:43:42 -0500, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
>I'm sure this is related to some changes to menu.c that went in
>last night. Roll back to yesterday's version and you should be
>okay. I'll see if i can fix the problem.
Mh... I trusted you on that patch, and didn't observe any adverse
eff
Martin Karlsson wrote:
> I'm tired of seeing ' To mutt-users' in the index; I would like to
> see my address instead.
>
> I suppose the solution is to change... index_format? (WAG)
Yes, replace the %L with %F or %n to suit your tastes.
Hi all.
I've been googling around and reading TFM wor quite a while now, but
to no avail:
I'm tired of seeing ' To mutt-users' in the index; I would like to
see my address instead.
I suppose the solution is to change... index_format? (WAG)
Please help me with this one.
TIA
--
Martin Karlsson
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 01:50:23PM -0800, Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2002, Daniel Eisenbud wrote:
> > That description isn't enough for me to have any idea what you're
> > describing. Could you make a small thread and draw (do "set ascii_chars"
> > if you want to be
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002, Daniel Eisenbud wrote:
> That description isn't enough for me to have any idea what you're
> describing. Could you make a small thread and draw (do "set ascii_chars"
> if you want to be able to just copy and paste the index display into
> your email) what it looks like in 1.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 12:35:14PM -0800, Ken Weingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry if I missed this in the documentation, but what has changed with
> threading from 1.3.24 to 1.3.27? I am finding now that consecutive
> posts from the same thread look like seperate messages in the index,
>
Sorry if I missed this in the documentation, but what has changed with
threading from 1.3.24 to 1.3.27? I am finding now that consecutive
posts from the same thread look like seperate messages in the index,
each with '+->' in the index and identical subjects.
Thanks.
-Ken
* On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 03:25:32PM -0500,
* "Justin R. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thus spake parv ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > problem is when no "~N~P" messages are found, fails.
> > then regardless of failure, "N" flag is toggled, or
> > cleared, of the first new/unread message.
> Good
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thus spake parv ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> there is a problem w/ jrm's version, and will be w/ my version if
> tag-pattern is changed from "~P" to "~N~P".
>
> problem is when no "~N~P" messages are found, fails.
> then regardless of failure, "N" flag
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote parv thusly...
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> wrote Justin R. Miller thusly...
> >
> ...
> > folder-hook . push 'T~N~P\n;N\n\ct.\n'
> >
> > Note that this is untested, but what I think I'm trying to do is, upon
> > entering a folder, tag all new me
> Does anybody have suggestions on how to get back to where I used
> to be?
I'm sure this is related to some changes to menu.c that went in last
night. Roll back to yesterday's version and you should be okay. I'll see if
i can fix the problem.
--
Mike Schiraldi
VeriSign Applied Research
smi
On 29-Jan-2002 11:53 Jeremy Blosser wrote:
| On Jan 29, Dale Woolridge [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
| > http://www.woolridge.org/mutt/patches/patch-1.3.26.dw.pgp-traditional.2
| >
| > It will apply cleanly to 1.3.26, but I don't know about 1.5.0. If the
| > patch applies cleanly to 1.5
On Jan 29, Michael Montagne [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > folder-hook lists 'color index brightmagenta default "~x
>mithrandir.codesorcery.net !~P"'
>
> Can you explain how this works?
It matches if the References: header (specified by the ~x pattern) contains
the pattern mithrandir.codes
On Jan 29, Dale Woolridge [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> http://www.woolridge.org/mutt/patches/patch-1.3.26.dw.pgp-traditional.2
>
> It will apply cleanly to 1.3.26, but I don't know about 1.5.0. If the
> patch applies cleanly to 1.5, please let me know.
Nope. Note that Thomas has be
>On 28/01/02, from the brain of Justin R. Miller tumbled:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Thus spake Nicholas A. Martini ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> folder-hook lists 'color index brightmagenta default "~x
>mithrandir.codesorcery.net !~P"'
Can you explain how this wor
On 29-Jan-2002 09:01 David Ellement wrote:
| >
| > On Jan 29, Nick Wilson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
| > > Hunk #1 FAILED at 2.
| > > 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file po/it.po.rej
| > > Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
| > > 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file po/nl.po.rej
| >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Dale Woolridge blurted
> In short, you may safely ignore these three failures. Everything else
> will have been applied correctly and will work correctly.
Yep, and it's a definate improvement on the outlook patch!
- --
Nic
On 29-Jan-2002 16:39 Nick Wilson wrote:
| 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file po/it.po.rej
| 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file po/nl.po.rej
| 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file po/sv.po.rej
This is a known problem (my fault). I import mutt source
On 020129, at 09:58:16, Jeremy Blosser wrote
> Basically, you have a version of Mutt different from the one this patch was
> made against. Since it's all failing in just translation stuff, and that
> stuff probably doesn't matter to you, you can go ahead and just build with
> what succeeded and n
I'm baffled, did the default for all the colors change? I run
my terminals black-on-grey, and mutt used to be the same, now
all the text is grey, and the backround is back... I don't have
ANY color settings in my etc/Muttrc, or my .muttrc, I'm a little
baffled.
Does anybody have suggestions on ho
On Jan 29, Nick Wilson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> * and then Jeremy Blosser blurted
> > On Jan 29, Nick Wilson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > > Hmmm... Thanks Jeremy, that's getting results, unfortunately it's
> > > failing on each hunk
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 09:35:26AM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> > Sounds great, maybe you could send part of your muttrc responsible for
> > such colors?
> Heh, here. There are some comments at the top about the verbosity of the
> way it's done.
Thanks a lot, BTW I'm still being amazed by mutt
* Bob Heckel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020129 02:42]:
> > does anyone know how to make mutt show messages from yoursef
> > (or another address) show up as read, or not new, or something?
> > it would be handy for high-volume lists.
> Here's a simplified version of how I set up my .muttrc:
> score '~t [
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Jeremy Blosser blurted
> On Jan 29, Nick Wilson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > Hmmm... Thanks Jeremy, that's getting results, unfortunately it's
> > failing on each hunk?
>
> What output?
Here ya go ..
patching file PATCHES
patc
I'm using Mutt and URLview to pull out the URL's inside a message. But I
keep getting messages where URL's split on two lines. URLview doesn't seem
to realize that it's still a URL. Any suggestions or better programs?
Thanks,
Troy
On Jan 29, Nick Wilson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Hmmm... Thanks Jeremy, that's getting results, unfortunately it's
> failing on each hunk?
What output?
msg23953/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Jan 29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:38:45PM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> > Yeah, you can do some great stuff with that. My own settings do the
> > following:
>
> Sounds great, maybe you could send part of your muttrc responsible for
> such color
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Jeremy Blosser blurted
> On Jan 29, Nick Wilson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > from inside the untarred mutt dir:
> > $ patch --dry-run -i ../dales_patch-xxx
> > [snip]
> > and that's where I'm stuck, I've tried -p0 and -p1 instead
On Jan 29, Nick Wilson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> from inside the untarred mutt dir:
> $ patch --dry-run -i ../dales_patch-xxx
> [snip]
> can't find file to patch at input line 147
> Perhaps you should have used the -p or --strip option?
> [snip]
> and that's where I'm stuck, I've tried -p0
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:38:45PM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> Yeah, you can do some great stuff with that. My own settings do the
> following:
Sounds great, maybe you could send part of your muttrc responsible for
such colors?
--
_.|._ |_ _. | Adam Byrtek, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(_|||_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Viktor Rosenfeld blurted
> I just tested the patch, it applies correctly except for some language
> stuff. I'll send Dale a mail about that.
Hmmm... Got my clean version (27i) and I can't do it :-( I fear my
education is lacking. Mig
40 matches
Mail list logo
