Hi,
RFC2822 defines a possibility to put group names in To/Cc etc ... Format
is described in RFC2828 Section 3.4 Addesss Specification
"
When it is desirable to treat several mailboxes as a single unit
(i.e., in a distribution list), the group construct can be used. The
group construct
Vincent Lefevre writes:
>> I wrote:
>> However, none of the bindings or macros that have a ";" in them are working
>> when mutt runs.
>I have no such problem. For instance, I have:
>bindindex,pager "\e[1;3A" previous-unread
>so that I can type Meta-Up to trigger this function.
>
All,
I know this borders being a vim question, but I was hoping for some
clarification on why my emails look strange on some clients.
As a software developer I use vim every day without issue; here are
the relevant settings that may be causing my heartache:
" autocomment, set formatoptions
"
" t
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 03:15:32AM +0100, Simon Ruderich wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:14:27PM +0100, Tomas Nordin wrote:
> > Hi Mutters
> >
> > I have two accounts. On one of them the mails that are new to me (not
> > read) get the status flag N, as in New. On the other, new mails get the
>
The post below was supposed to go to the mutt-dev list but accidentally got
posted to mutt-users. (Don't ask!)
Anyway, for those following along, with the help of Vincent Lefevre and
Ian Collier, the answer turned out to be that the troublesome keys were
actually defined in the xterm terminfo de
On 14Jan2016 16:23, James wrote:
I know this borders being a vim question, but I was hoping for some
clarification on why my emails look strange on some clients.
Sound llike you want format=flowed, of which there has been some recent
discussion. This message is so formatted. Examine it on you
On 15Jan2016 09:20, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 14Jan2016 16:23, James wrote:
I know this borders being a vim question, but I was hoping for some
clarification on why my emails look strange on some clients.
Sound llike you want format=flowed, of which there has been some
recent discussion. Th
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:15:38PM +0100, Tomas Nordin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 03:15:32AM +0100, Simon Ruderich wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:14:27PM +0100, Tomas Nordin wrote:
>>> Hi Mutters
>>>
>>> I have two accounts. On one of them the mails that are new to me (not
>>> read) get
