Re: Opening multipart/related (was: HTML email?)

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 06:28:13PM +0200, Andy Spiegl wrote: Do you know a way how to open the whole multipart/related and send it to a browser? Christian Ebert has a utility, viewhtmlmsg, that may work for you. (I haven't tried it myself, though).

Opening multipart/related (was: HTML email?)

We had this discussion about text/html attachments recently. Now, I was wondering how to deal with "multipart/related" I get emails like this: I 1 [multipa/alternativ, 7bit, 1.0M] I 2 ├─> [text/plain, quoted, utf-8, 29K] I 3 └─> [multipa/related

Re: HTML email?

> > That's because all my groups are computed from my address db. > Same here. I guess I have to update my script which does that. Done :-) Now I'm wondering what cool things I can do with it. Index coloring, limiting, searching sounds easy but not really necessary since I'm sorting my mails into

Re: HTML email?

> However, the manual's misleading: We agree on that. :-) > > - Can I group mutt aliases with -addr or just addresses? > Not sure what you mean here. Sorry, I meant: does "-addr" also match alias names? I guess not. > That's because all my groups are computed from my address db. Same here. I gu

Re: HTML email?

On 09Apr2021 22:41, Andy Spiegl wrote: >> So in fact I choose the alternative order per message: >Great idea! And thanks for pointing out the "group" command which was >completely unknown to me so far. Unfortunately I'm missing some good >examples in the manual in order to completely understand

Re: HTML email?

Cameron: > However, there are plenty of platforms which are HTML first and provide > either very poor plaintext equivalents of empty ones, or ever just stuff > the raw HTML into both parts. Yes, exactly! What a PITA. I gave up explaining the issue to the senders because most of them simply don

Re: HTML email?

On 07Apr2021 07:22, John Niendorf wrote: >How do you all deal with HTML email? Composing HTML is a can of worms. I'd need to dig into the list archives - it has been discussed. Displaying HTML uses 2 main settings: The .mailcap entry for text/html with the "copiousoutput"

Re: HTML email?

And I will open a can with worms: "deal" in what sense ? Just reading the html email or are you talking about replying to the HTML email with HTML email or maybe you're talking about keeping HTML replies intact and replying with plain txt ? There are several use cases which h

Re: HTML email?

On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 07:22:51AM -0600, John Niendorf wrote: > Hi Folks, > > How do you all deal with HTML email? I delete them.

Re: HTML email?

On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 08:00:38AM -0600, John Niendorf wrote: > Thank you - where do you put the python3 script and how do you let mutt know > it is there? Put it somewhere in $PATH, or you can use an absolution path. -- Best regards, lilydjwg

Re: HTML email?

Thank you - where do you put the python3 script and how do you let mutt know it is there?

HTML email?

Hi Folks, How do you all deal with HTML email? Thank you, John

Re: HTML email?

On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 07:22:51AM -0600, John Niendorf wrote: > Hi Folks, > > How do you all deal with HTML email? My .muttrc is set mailcap_path= ~/.mutt/mailcap auto_view text/html ~/.mutt/mailcap is text/html; w3m -I %{charset} -T text/html; copiousoutput;

Re: HTML email?

Hello John, Il 07 aprile 2021 alle 07:22 John Niendorf ha scritto: > How do you all deal with HTML email? This in mailcap text/html; w3m -I %{charset} -T text/html; copiousoutput and then in mutt itself —F

Re: HTML email?

On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 07:22:51AM -0600, John Niendorf wrote: > Hi Folks, > > How do you all deal with HTML email? > > Thank you, > > John I view it in mutt with elinks -force-html -dump -dump-color-mode 1. If that doesn't work well, I open it in my browser with a s

Re: Truncated link in html email

On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 07:23:16PM -0600, boB Stepp wrote: > On 21/02/08 07:04PM, boB Stepp wrote: >> Just now I came across one of those html emails that Mutt + urlview >> does not seem to be able to handle. This was an email from the >> clinic I go to that has embedded a "CLICK TO CHECK-IN" butt

Truncated link in html email

This was rejected from the Mutt server the first time. Am resending... On 21/02/08 07:04PM, boB Stepp wrote: Just now I came across one of those html emails that Mutt + urlview does not seem to be able to handle. This was an email from the clinic I go to that has embedded a "CLICK TO CHECK-IN"

Re: display html email in browser?

* Michael Tatge [2015-04-29 03:32]: > * On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 12:09PM -0400 Peter P. (peterpar...@fastmail.com) > muttered: > > Is there a way to have an html email rendered and displayed in a browser > > window? > > There used to be a page about that in the mutt wiki (w

Re: display html email in browser?

* On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 12:09PM -0400 Peter P. (peterpar...@fastmail.com) muttered: > Is there a way to have an html email rendered and displayed in a browser > window? There used to be a page about that in the mutt wiki (wiki.mutt.org) though I cannot find it right now. In short: ~/.mutt

Re: display html email in browser?

On 2015-04-28, Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2015-04-28, Grant Edwards wrote: > >> Yep. What many of us do is use w3m to view inside mutt, and then >> define a 'print' command to view it externally: >> >> text/html; w3m -T text/html -dump; copiousoutput; print = firefoxurl %s; > > Uh, in case your

Re: display html email in browser?

On 2015-04-28, Grant Edwards wrote: > Yep. What many of us do is use w3m to view inside mutt, and then > define a 'print' command to view it externally: > > text/html; w3m -T text/html -dump; copiousoutput; print = firefoxurl %s; Uh, in case your crystal ball was broken, that's a line from ~/

Re: display html email in browser?

On 2015-04-28, Peter P. wrote: > Dear fellow mutt users, > > Is there a way to have an html email rendered and displayed in a browser > window? I tried saving the html message part to disk and opened that > file, but there was no formatting, and some symbols were wrong. I use

Re: display html email in browser?

On 2015-04-28, Peter P. wrote: > * Francesco Ariis [2015-04-28 12:47]: >> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 12:09:34PM -0400, Peter P. wrote: >> > Dear fellow mutt users, >> > >> > Is there a way to have an html email rendered and displayed in a browser >> > w

Re: display html email in browser?

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:02:52PM -0400, Peter P. wrote: > Thanks Francesco, > That way the message gets displayed inside mutt using w3m. In my .muttrc I > have set > auto_view text/html application/x-pgp-message > and > text/html; /usr/bin/w3m -dump -T text/html '%s'; copiousoutput;

Re: display html email in browser?

"Peter P." writes: > * Francesco Ariis [2015-04-28 12:47]: >> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 12:09:34PM -0400, Peter P. wrote: >> > Dear fellow mutt users, >> > >> > Is there a way to have an html email rendered and displayed in a browser >> >

Re: display html email in browser?

* Francesco Ariis [2015-04-28 12:47]: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 12:09:34PM -0400, Peter P. wrote: > > Dear fellow mutt users, > > > > Is there a way to have an html email rendered and displayed in a browser > > window? > > Hello Peter, > once opened the messa

Re: display html email in browser?

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 12:09:34PM -0400, Peter P. wrote: > Dear fellow mutt users, > > Is there a way to have an html email rendered and displayed in a browser > window? Hello Peter, once opened the message, press 'v' (view-attachments) and then select the .html one and pr

display html email in browser?

Dear fellow mutt users, Is there a way to have an html email rendered and displayed in a browser window? I tried saving the html message part to disk and opened that file, but there was no formatting, and some symbols were wrong. Motivation: Wanting to print a few html emails in their original

Re: html email

Terrebonne, Quebec, Canada J6V 1P1 Tel:(450) 657-1214 Fax:(450) 657-9883 alain.marc...@infoc.ca -Original Message- From: Richard Zidlicky [mailto:rdzid...@googlemail.com] On Behalf Of Richard Sent: Monday, 17 January, 2011 16:44 To: Alain Marcoux Cc: mutt-users@mutt.org Subject: Re: html

Re: html email

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:02:15AM -0500, Alain Marcoux wrote: Hi, > Mutt -e "my_hdr Content-Type: text/html" -s subject emailadresse > It is on sco 6 version 1.4.2.1i this is quite an old version so you will not get much help for this version. Attaching html files should work as long as mut

html email

Hi When i use in interface option cntrl T to switch from text/plain to text/html and putting html code in body it is working fine. But If I use in command line it is not.why? Here is the commande I do Mutt -e "my_hdr Content-Type: text/html" -s subject emailadresse

Re: css/html email

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Monday, May 11 at 10:42 AM, quoth Jason Helfman: > I have used the lynx autoview rule for years, however it doesn't > seem to be translating well with Evolution, or css formats that are > going to my lovely mutt. Hmmm, I don't have trouble. I u

css/html email

Hi. I am having issues in having any sort of formatted text go through lynx or w3m. I have noticed that if I save the information in an .html file, and view it with a web browser, it looks, as it should. I would like to avoid doing this, however all my autoviews are not working. I have used the

Re: responding to HTML email

On 2008-03-05, Bill Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 02:04:48PM -0600, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 5 at 12:00 PM, quoth Bill Moseley: > > >Most of the time I get HTML email that also has a text/plain part, > &g

Re: responding to HTML email

* On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 Bill Moseley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered: > Is there anyway to say use auto_view and the .mailcap entry for the > pager, but in the attachment menu use a different mailcap entry? > I didn't see in 3.3.1 Optional Fields a way to have different mailcap > entries for the pager

Re: responding to HTML email

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 5 at 04:12 PM, quoth Bill Moseley: > Is there anyway to say use auto_view and the .mailcap entry for the > pager, but in the attachment menu use a different mailcap entry? I > didn't see in 3.3.1 Optional Fields a way to have dif

Re: responding to HTML email

On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 02:04:48PM -0600, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > On Wednesday, March 5 at 12:00 PM, quoth Bill Moseley: > >Most of the time I get HTML email that also has a text/plain part, > >and that's what I reply to. > > > >I've been getting mail from some

Re: responding to HTML email

=- Bill Moseley wrote on Wed 5.Mar'08 at 12:00:52 -0800 -= > I suspect there's an much easier way to deal with HTML-only email > (other than /dev/null). The wiki-faq tells you, listed in the welcome-to-this-list message. -- © Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort

Re: responding to HTML email

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 5 at 12:00 PM, quoth Bill Moseley: >Most of the time I get HTML email that also has a text/plain part, >and that's what I reply to. > >I've been getting mail from someone using Thunderbird that is >tex

responding to HTML email

Most of the time I get HTML email that also has a text/plain part, and that's what I reply to. I've been getting mail from someone using Thunderbird that is text/html only. What I've been doing is hitting "e" to bring up the message in vim, highlight the HTML and ! (fi

Re: quoting/answering to an html email

* On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 Lucas GR ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered: [text/html messages] > Is it possible to include the text of the received message or the whole > messase (formatted somehow) as a quotation into the message we are > answering with? http://wiki.mutt.org/index.cgi?MuttFaq/Attachment HTH

quoting/answering to an html email

Hi you all, I don't like htmml email messages very much, but i must say that they are very useful sometimes when we *need* to send images or whatever in the message body. It is a fact that there are lots of people sending html emails without even knowing it, because of their email account provide

Re: HTML email, was Re: reading color quoted replies

On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 05:38:15PM -0600, Travis H. wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 06:34:19PM +0100, Rado S wrote: > > > Is there still considerable danger in dumping html via w3m or > > > some other html to text converter? > > Well, theoretically, any time you operate on data provided by someon

Re: HTML email, was Re: reading color quoted replies

On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 06:34:19PM +0100, Rado S wrote: > > Is there still considerable danger in dumping html via w3m or > > some other html to text converter? Well, theoretically, any time you operate on data provided by someone who may not be trustworthy, you face a risk. The magnitude of the

Re: HTML email, was Re: reading color quoted replies

ork. Ok thanks. I do it now, just wondering if there were any security risks. > > > Also, we correspond with several DoD organizations on a weekly > > basis. We've never had an email blocked, nor have we been told > > not to send html email. > > Some blocks are bla

Re: HTML email, was Re: reading color quoted replies

e've never had an email blocked, nor have we been told > not to send html email. Some blocks are black holes: no response. Not being told: maybe the other side sorts them as spam and deals with it later when searching for false positives rather than responding normally. The correspondence its

Re: HTML email, was Re: reading color quoted replies

ment by authority", I point you to the fact that > the DoD banned the use of HTML email and OWA: > > http://www.fcw.com/article97178-12-22-06-Web > Perhaps it starts with the DoD. Interestingly, all of the cited anecdotes suggest that html is not getting blocked, but is getting co

Re: HTML email, was Re: reading color quoted replies

On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 06:31:03PM +0100, Rado S wrote: > ... one part being the defensive things listed by Travis, but you > also shouldn't forget that some "outsiders" rate html-ized mails > as spammy, so at least the score increases or in the worst case > it's outright blocked unless white-liste

Re: HTML email, was Re: reading color quoted replies

=- Travis H. wrote on Thu 1.Feb'07 at 23:04:23 -0600 -= > On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 03:59:51PM -0500, Marc Vaillant wrote: > > This just isn't realistic. What sort of view of mutt do you > > think an outlook user (potential mutt user) is going to get if > > I tell them "Hey check out this great tex

HTML email, was Re: reading color quoted replies

fuse and mislead the user. Further, say that email worked fine with no phishing incidents for a good 20 years before HTML came along. Do you think HTML email is so important that the Internet did without it for 20 years? If the person needs to send an attachment, that's fine. That takes

Re: [OT] html email

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

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

* David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > ...and then Thomas Hurst said... > > Gzip your message body and you'll probably find half of mutt-users > > have it decompressed and viewed automatically :) > > That would make tools like grep pretty useless. > > Well, zgrep takes care of that, too, but i

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

Thomas -- ...and then Thomas Hurst said... % % * David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: % % > Off-topic meandering: % > I think it would be lovely to automatically compress all email before % > sending and have it opened on the other end, % % Gzip your message body and you'll probably find half

Re: html email

Alas! Joel Hammer spake thus: > I thought NT stands for New Technology. MS is always trying to make > their customers forget about the last operating system. I always thought it was "Ne Twerking" because NT is supposed to be so secure for networks or something ;) -- Rob 'Feztaa' Park [EMAIL PRO

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

* David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Off-topic meandering: > I think it would be lovely to automatically compress all email before > sending and have it opened on the other end, Gzip your message body and you'll probably find half of mutt-users have it decompressed and viewed automatically :

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

On 17:28 25 Jan 2002, David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Off-topic meandering: | I think it would be lovely to automatically compress all email before | sending and have it opened on the other end, but that not only gets | into more MIME types (I think it could be done pretty easily but haven'

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

On 14:09 25 Jan 2002, Michael Montagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | I often read about the evils os HTML email and since I do all my email | with mutt now, I appreciate text email. But something I don't | understand is the argument that it slows down the internet for everyone. | Isn&

Re: html email

I thought NT stands for New Technology. MS is always trying to make their customers forget about the last operating system. Joel > > Hr Well, as it is an NT dominated environment, anybody know > > what NT stands for? > > > > No Thoughts

Re: html email

On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 05:42:57PM -0600, Knute wrote: > On Sat, 26 Jan 2002, Nick Wilson wrote: > > > > * and then Michael Maibaum blurted > > > My favorite was the last bi-monthly report from our (win NT > > > dominated...) IT dept...It was a 4Mb word document for about a page and > > > a

Re: html email

On Jan 26, Knute [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Isn't that what logs are for? > > You know, to help diagnose issues such as that. Yeah. Our group maintains/checks our logs. The others... It's actually been hard for management to adjust to the idea that we can tell them what happened when they a

Re: html email

Alas! Knute spake thus: > By the way, why didn't they just put links to the pics instead? > Isn't that the reason for a wan or a lan? Give these guys a break, anybody who uses NT by choice can't be very bright ;) -- Rob 'Feztaa' Park [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- "When the authorities warn you of the d

Re: html email

On Sat, 26 Jan 2002, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > Yeah... there's a little more to that... we'd just switched from a Novell > Groupwise system to using Exchange for the group mail stuff with qmail on > the border handling the real incoming/outgoing mail (talk about your bad > news/good news situation

Re: html email

On Sat, 26 Jan 2002, Nick Wilson wrote: > * and then Michael Maibaum blurted > > My favorite was the last bi-monthly report from our (win NT > > dominated...) IT dept...It was a 4Mb word document for about a page and > > a half, plus some high res pics, plus all the revisions in the word > >

Re: html email

On Jan 26, Rob 'Feztaa' Park [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Alas! Jeremy Blosser spake thus: > > > one of the managers actually suggested it was a flaw of qmail that it > > didn't crash at this point, to act as a break point. :) > > Linux: Too stable for it's own good! > > That's a new one on me

Re: html email

Alas! Jeremy Blosser spake thus: > one of the managers actually suggested it was a flaw of qmail that it > didn't crash at this point, to act as a break point. :) Linux: Too stable for it's own good! That's a new one on me ;) -- Rob 'Feztaa' Park [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Microsoft - because God h

Re: html email

On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 12:58:50PM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote: > On Jan 26, Michael Maibaum [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > My favorite was the last bi-monthly report from our (win NT > > dominated...) IT dept...It was a 4Mb word document for about a page and > > a half, plus some high res pics, p

Re: html email

On Jan 25, David Ellement [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > I also see this fairly often. Of course, because these folks care > about how their message looks, they also include "stationery", > background or border images. So I'll get a multipart/alternative > message with one or two image attachments

Re: html email

On Jan 26, Michael Maibaum [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > My favorite was the last bi-monthly report from our (win NT > dominated...) IT dept...It was a 4Mb word document for about a page and > a half, plus some high res pics, plus all the revisions in the word > document. It was sent to every email

Re: html email

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * and then Michael Maibaum blurted > My favorite was the last bi-monthly report from our (win NT > dominated...) IT dept...It was a 4Mb word document for about a page and > a half, plus some high res pics, plus all the revisions in the word > doc

Re: html email

On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 09:17:14AM -0800, Michael Maibaum wrote: > My favorite was the last bi-monthly report from our (win NT > dominated...) IT dept...It was a 4Mb word document for about a page and I'm not able to top that. (There are some instances where individuals have sent larger attachme

Re: html email

On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 12:05:21PM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 09:52:26PM -0800, David Ellement wrote: > > The "best" ones are from the IT department, rejoicing in their > > latest efficiency measures... > > worse - the ones that have the message in plain text, along wi

Re: html email

On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 09:52:26PM -0800, David Ellement wrote: > The "best" ones are from the IT department, rejoicing in their > latest efficiency measures... worse - the ones that have the message in plain text, along with a 500kb attachment in M$ Word repeating word-for-word the same informa

Re: html email

David -- ...and then David Ellement said... % ... % background or border images. So I'll get a multipart/alternative % message with one or two image attachments, where the text part is % about 300 byte, the html part about 3k bytes, and the images about % 30-100k bytes each. % % The "best" one

Re: html email

On 020124, at 08:19:44, Gary Johnson wrote > I receive a lot of internal memos from administrative assistants > (formerly known as secretaries) formatted as HTML. ... > > 3. In all fairness [donning flame suit now], HTML e-mail looks better > to most users than does plain text. You can cha

Re: [OT] html email

> > I suppose it's equally valid for them to say, "I, the sender, should be able > to control how a message is presented to you." > No, that's the whole point, because with email the (time, money) extra expense associated with downloading useless html formatting is paid by the receiver, not the

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 02:09:09PM -0800 I heard the voice of Michael Montagne, and lo! it spake thus: > > Isn't HTML just text? The tags are evaluated and formatted at the > client. So is it just that there is more text than there needs to be? > Or is it the links and scripts that are often inc

Re: [OT] html email

Rob 'Feztaa' Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Alas! Alexander Skwar spake thus: > > Well, sure it is - however don't all the HTML capable MUAs convert texts > > like http://this-is-not.a.link.de into a clickable link? Mozilla does. > > Mutt highlights that as a mail, and urlview recognizes it

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

Michael -- ...and then Michael Montagne said... % % >On 25/01/02, from the brain of Marco tumbled: % > You must answer that it's like mailing a letter inside a three pounds % > box ... at the expense of the receiver. ... % % I often read about the evils os HTML email and sin

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * and then Michael Montagne blurted > I often read about the evils os HTML email and since I do all my email > with mutt now, I appreciate text email. But something I don't > understand is the argument that it slows down th

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

On Jan 25, Michael Montagne [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Isn't HTML just text? The tags are evaluated and formatted at the > client. So is it just that there is more text than there needs to be? Yes. "Just text" doesn't mean much; text or binary, it's all 1's and 0's in the end. The important

Re: Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

EN for outlook/windows users. They > don't get it, and most times, actually, it's not their fault. > > Marco I often read about the evils os HTML email and since I do all my email with mutt now, I appreciate text email. But something I don't understand is the argument

Don't mention MUAS to fight html email

> > > 2. I got tired of explaining text-only MUAs to them only to > > > receive comments like, "I guess Unix isn't very good if it > > > can't even display different colors and fonts like my PC can. .. > > .What do you say to comments like that? There's > > no point, they'll neve

Re: [OT] html email

Alas! Nick Wilson spake thus: > 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 would make it

Re: [OT] html email

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * and then Roman Neuhauser blurted > Like this? > > if(/^Content-Type: text\/html/ && hasaddr([EMAIL PROTECTED])) > to $MBOXDIR/crap > > X-Warning: had a few beers. Anyone got the equivelant Procmail recipe for dumpi

Re: [OT] html email

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * and then Brian Clark blurted > :0: > * ^From.*pc-html-user@domain\.com > /dev/null > > Save yourself from having to explain further. :-) Hehe, yeah, that'd do it! - -- Nick Wilson Tel:+45 3325 0688 Fax:+45 3325 0677 Web:www.ex

Re: [OT] html email

On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 05:49:27PM +0100, Nick Wilson wrote: > > 2. I got tired of explaining text-only MUAs to them only to receive > > comments like, "I guess Unix isn't very good if it can't even > > display different colors and fonts like my PC can. When are you > > guys going to

Re: [OT] html email

> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:42:05 -0500 > From: Brian Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OT] html email > > * Matthew D. Fuller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 24. 2002 18:29]: > If it catches a friend, newletter, etc, I just add the s

Re: [OT] html email

* Brian Clark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 24. 2002 18:54]: > But to make this semi-OT: D'oh, make that `semi-On-Topic' -- Brian Clark | Avoiding the general public since 1805! Fingerprint: 07CE FA37 8DF6 A109 8119 076B B5A2 E5FB E4D0 C7C8 Stop searching forever. Happiness is unattainable.

Re: [OT] html email

> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 17:36:28 -0600 > From: Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OT] html email > > On Jan 24, Matthew D. Fuller [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > Actually, I've found that this: > > if(/^Content-Ty

Re: [OT] html email

#x27;ve had good results. I have had luck in talking with a few people that liked to send me HTML email, and I managed to get them to stop (as in, "you don't do it, you won't hear from me again"). But to make this semi-OT: For the ddd's , I use this, which someone els

Re: [OT] html email

On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 06:18:43PM -0500 I heard the voice of Brian Clark, and lo! it spake thus: > > :0: > * ^From.*pc-html-user@domain\.com > /dev/null Actually, I've found that this: if(/^Content-Type: text\/html/) to $MBOXDIR/crap catches more of my spam than any other of my off-the-cuf

Re: [OT] html email

So sprach »David T-G« am 2002-01-24 um 14:48:30 -0500 : > ... and even clickable if you're running under eterm, IIRC. Check the gnome-term (and I think also the KDE konsole) also feature this. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepa

Re: [OT] html email

Alas! Gary Johnson spake thus: > 2. I got tired of explaining text-only MUAs to them only to receive > comments like, "I guess Unix isn't very good if it can't even > display different colors and fonts like my PC can. When are you > guys going to start using Windows?" Yeah, Unix rea

Re: [OT] html email

Rob, et al -- ...and then Feztaa said... % % Alas! Alexander Skwar spake thus: % > Well, sure it is - however don't all the HTML capable MUAs convert texts % > like http://this-is-not.a.link.de into a clickable link? Mozilla does. % % Mutt highlights that as a mail, and urlview recognizes it a

Re: [OT] html email

On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 05:49:27PM +0100, Nick Wilson wrote: > * and then Gary Johnson blurted > > It depends on how you have mutt configured. I have my mailcap file and > > auto_view command set up to display HTML attachments as plain text in > > mutt's pager and have display_filter set to

Re: [OT] html email

Alas! Alexander Skwar spake thus: > Well, sure it is - however don't all the HTML capable MUAs convert texts > like http://this-is-not.a.link.de into a clickable link? Mozilla does. Mutt highlights that as a mail, and urlview recognizes it as a link. No need for HTML-enabled mailers at all. Not

Re: [OT] html email

So sprach »Nick Wilson« am 2002-01-23 um 18:04:08 +0100 : > find clicking a link in an email easier than pasting it into a browser. > It /is/ easier. They're just not aware of the down points of html mail. Well, sure it is - however don't all the HTML capable MUAs convert texts like http://this-i

Re: [OT] html email

> 2. I got tired of explaining text-only MUAs to them only to receive > comments like, "I guess Unix isn't very good if it can't even > display different colors and fonts like my PC can. When are you > guys going to start using Windows?" It all comes down to who should be in control

Re: [OT] html email

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * and then Gary Johnson blurted > It depends on how you have mutt configured. I have my mailcap file and > auto_view command set up to display HTML attachments as plain text in > mutt's pager and have display_filter set to remove the "[-- ... --

Re: [OT] html email

On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 12:47:25PM -0500, Thomas E. Dickey wrote: > the colors are fixable - what is painful for html email regarding mutt is > that since the html attachments don't show up except as a single line, I > tend to delete the email before reading it. (There are i

  1   2   >