Is there some way that I can change these from the current 600 to
something less restrictive? I looked through the manual and there
doesn't seem to be any option in there for changing them.
thanks
Struan
--
Struan Donald
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Code Flunkey, 365 Plc.
http://www.365corp.com/
n equivalent on the originator's MUA).
If you get mail from this (these) person(s) regularly, you might suggest
to him/her (them) that he/she (they) change the MUA's attachment settings
to MIME.
%
% Following that is the ASCII encoded mess.
%
% If I re-send the message, pick it up in W
dress that uses
LookOut!,
Actually, Eudora, but, FWIW, I've also adopted Look Out! as the new
name :)
> use that to save it, and then open the saved attachment in MSWord". It's
> no great shakes to decode a uuencoded file (can you guess how? :-) but
> it's not a sta
On 2000-05-27 21:49:21 -0400, John P. Verel wrote:
> Ah. So the issue is the sender, in this case
> presumably Lotus Notes.
Yes, it is, and it is complete and utter brain-damage on
Lotus' side. For some kind of handler, you may try the
attached shell script, which helps at least in some
situat
On 2000-09-27 13:29:35 -0500, Petr Hlustik wrote:
> I think somebody asked about this earlier but the problem apparently
> persists: mutt does not decode attachment names. Example:
>
> [-- Attachment #2: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?mar=BBa=2Ejpg?= --]
> [-- Type: image/jpeg, Encoding: ba
Petr Hlustik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 27 Sep 2000:
> I think somebody asked about this earlier but the problem apparently
> persists: mutt does not decode attachment names.
> Assuming the name encoding was done correctly by the sender's mailer,
> can this be fi
Hello,
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 04:52:50PM +0100, Daniel Kollar wrote:
>
> Can procmail be instructed to remove the html stuff and to change the
> mime type to "application/pgp" or what else is necessary ?
>
for the pgp stuff you can add:
:0
* !^Content-Type: text/plain
* !^Conte
ithin w3m.
On 01/28/01, 02:58:51PM -0500, John P. Verel wrote:
> I'm looking for a good mailcap entry to print from a w3m paged html
> attachment from within mutt. Any suggestions?
>
> TIA
> --
> John P. Verel
> Norwalk, CT
--
John P. Verel
Norwalk, CT
In the attachment menu of an email I received, I hit 'd' on an
attached jpeg, then 'q' to get back to the index. The messaged showed
the lowercase 'd' indicating that one part was marked for deletion. I
resync the mailbox and it doesn't delete the attach
I have fetch email from my friend with attachment file 2.8 MB. And I read
this email with mutt and I view attachment and save it. But after I save the
size change only 2M. It is right or not?
Thanks
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 01:29:31PM -0800, Michael Montagne wrote:
> I need to modify an attachment (delete a hyphen) and then reattach it to
> the original email and bounce it to the original recipient.
> The people in our office who use Outlook (which is everyone but me) need
> t
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 01:29:31PM -0800, Michael Montagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I need to modify an attachment (delete a hyphen) and then reattach it to
> the original email and bounce it to the original recipient.
> The people in our office who use Outlook (which is everyo
On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Michael Montagne wrote:
>
>I need to modify an attachment (delete a hyphen) and then reattach it to
>the original email and bounce it to the original recipient.
>The people in our office who use Outlook (which is everyone but me) need
>to be able to read i
>On 17/01/02, from the brain of Nicolas Rachinsky tumbled:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 01:29:31PM -0800, Michael Montagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> > I need to modify an attachment (delete a hyphen) and then reattach it to
> > the original email and bounce i
On 14:19 17 Jan 2002, Michael Montagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > I would try "e", delete the hyphen, "b".
| > Nicolas
|
| Very simple with manual intervention. But how do I automate the
| process? Can I use procmail to route to a script, then bounce to the
| original recipient? If so, can
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 02:19:23PM -0800, Michael Montagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 17/01/02, from the brain of Nicolas Rachinsky tumbled:
> > I would try "e", delete the hyphen, "b".
>
> Very simple with manual intervention. But how do I automate the
> process? Can I use procmail to ro
Michael --
...and then Michael Montagne said...
%
% >On 17/01/02, from the brain of Nicolas Rachinsky tumbled:
%
% > On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 01:29:31PM -0800, Michael Montagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
% > > I need to modify an attachment (delete a hyphen) and t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all
I just spoke to an Lookout! user who says she's getting my emails as
both normally and as an attachment at the same time. This is most
strange and confusing.
I have the outlook compat patch and as you can see I use $p_c_t so
everyon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
is there any reason why I'm recieving a zipped file from an Lookout!
user as inline content?
Much thanks
- --
- ---
www.explodingnet.com |Projects, Forums and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Friday, August 21 at 12:44 PM, quoth belge...@seznam.cz:
> I often have to attach a file with a long name. I can see only the
> beginning of the path. The problem is when I have several files with
> the same long name and a different ending (lik
* Kyle Wheeler on Friday, August 21, 2009 at 14:10:36 -0500
> On Friday, August 21 at 12:44 PM, quoth belge...@seznam.cz:
>> Also, how do I remove an attachement after attaching it and finding
>> out that it is wrong?
>
> That's easy - you're looking for the command, which I
> believe is bound
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Friday, August 21 at 08:29 PM, quoth Christian Ebert:
>* Kyle Wheeler on Friday, August 21, 2009 at 14:10:36 -0500
>> On Friday, August 21 at 12:44 PM, quoth belge...@seznam.cz:
>>> Also, how do I remove an attachement after attaching it and findi
On 21:10 Fri 21 Aug , Kyle Wheeler wrote:
> On Friday, August 21 at 12:44 PM, quoth belge...@seznam.cz:
> > I often have to attach a file with a long name. I can see only the
> > beginning of the path. The problem is when I have several files with
> > the same long name and a different ending (
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Sunday, August 23 at 02:14 AM, quoth Martin Alaçam:
>> That's easy - you're looking for the command, which I
>> believe is bound to 'd' by default.
>>
>
>Thanks for the answers. Is there not a way to make it show only the file
>name, not the whol
Hi All
My company policy is report spam email to the abuse as an outlook
attachment. I know mutt can forward email as mime attachment. How do I
make sure it sends the attachment just like the
way outlook can forward an email as an attachment? Do I need to make
any special macro to achieve that or
How do I attach a local file to an outgoing message using Mutt with a
Gmail IMAP account?
I have used Offlineimap for a month or so and could attach a file
without any issues, but recently I have moved away from Offlineimap in
favor of connecting to my Gmail IMAP account. Whenever I try to attach
Hello,
IIRC this will help (put it in .miuttrc):
set rfc2047_parameters=yes
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 10:35:49AM +0300,
Cristopher Thomas wrote:
> =?utf-8?B?SU1HMDA1MTItMjAxMDEwMTEtMTcwMS5qcGc=?=
--
With best regards,
xrgtn (+380501102966/+380636177128/xr...@jabber.kiev.ua)
tion=HTML Text; nametemplate=%s.html
>
> Although the entry for links does not have the field copiousoutput, it
> is not being used for viewing an html attachment from the mutt
> attachments menu, as it should be. Instead it is using the lynx entry. I
> am using Mutt 1.5.21 (2010-09-15,
soutput;
> description=HTML Text; nametemplate=%s.html
>
> Although the entry for links does not have the field copiousoutput, it
> is not being used for viewing an html attachment from the mutt
> attachments menu, as it should be. Instead it is using the lynx entry. I
> am
lthough the entry for links does not have the field copiousoutput, it
> > is not being used for viewing an html attachment from the mutt
> > attachments menu, as it should be. Instead it is using the lynx entry. I
> > am using Mutt 1.5.21 (2010-09-15, Gentoo 1.5.21-r1).
> >
> > Any clues?
>
> needsterminal?
This option is already in the mailcap entry.
Romildo
html; /usr/bin/lynx -dump -force_html '%s';
> > > copiousoutput; description=HTML Text; nametemplate=%s.html
> > >
> > > Although the entry for links does not have the field copiousoutput, it
> > > is not being used for viewing an html attachment from the mutt
orce_html '%s'; needsterminal;
> > > > description=HTML Text; nametemplate=%s.html
> > > > /etc/mailcap:text/html; /usr/bin/lynx -dump -force_html '%s';
> > > > copiousoutput; description=HTML Text; nametemplate=%s.html
> > > >
>
es not have the field copiousoutput, it
> is not being used for viewing an html attachment from the mutt
> attachments menu, as it should be. Instead it is using the lynx entry. I
> am using Mutt 1.5.21 (2010-09-15, Gentoo 1.5.21-r1).
>
> Any clues?
>
> Romildo
* José Romildo Malaquias [11-08-10 14:17]:
>
> With the entry:
>
> text/html; links %s; nametemplate=%s.html
>
>
> it does not work:
>
> [-- Autoview using /usr/bin/lynx -du
Hello,
I have a problem when I send emails having an pdf as attachment. The pdf
arrives as text on the other side. This means it is displayed as text in
the mail client. This is due to the fact that the MIME-type is text. How
can I change this behaviour? I can successfully send emails with zip
similar.
When I send the same attachment from Thunderbird, the name is displayed
on recipient side without problems.
I opened a ticket (#3561) but now I think that it was maybe
too early and maybe I'm just missing a config option in .muttrc?
Thank you
Lubos
Hello,
I encounter the following problem:
I send a mail with an attached file pdf. The recipient of the mail uses
the web mail SFR-mail and sees that there is an attached document pdf of
231 kb without name, but he can't open it.
If the recipient of the mail opens the mail with his account gmail he
On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 05:38:41PM -0700, Michael Montagne wrote:
> I'm playing around a bit with rox. There is a feature called Send-to.
> It will take a selection of files and pass them to a program. What I'd
> like is to pass the files to mutt and have them be the attachments.
> I tried:
> kon
>On 14/08/02, from the brain of Gary Johnson tumbled:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 05:38:41PM -0700, Michael Montagne wrote:
> > I'm playing around a bit with rox. There is a feature called Send-to.
> > It will take a selection of files and pass them to a program. What I'd
> > like is to pass the f
Hello, I found what seems to be a bug.
Well, it IS a bug. Don't know if it is mutt's or LookOut's.
I received a message from someone using outlook containing an email
attached (*.eml). Unfortunately, outlook sends the attachment as
"application/octet-stream", so mutt
Hi,
I have different signatures files for different id's. I'm using
send-hook, reply hook for the same. Hooks seems to be working fine in
pager view.
But when I view the attachment of a email and tag the [text/plain]
attachment, and press ; & r, the hooks are failing!
Any hint? I
to sending:
___
From: Dan Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Dan Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Bcc:
Subject: test attachment
Reply-To:
Fcc: =out
Security: Clear
-- Attachments
- I 1 /tmp/mutt-Tichodroma-1000-7496-228 [text/
Some other email clients should already have this plugin. If the email
body contains words like: attach(ed) or attachment(s), it will issue a
warning if no attachment is added when sending. How to implement this
in mutt?
--
regards,
GPG key
Hello,
>From time to time it happens to me that I do announce in the body of a
mail "I will attach foo bla ..." and at the end of the message I forget
to do this; the MUA evolution (which I was using some years ago) warned
me on sending, that the attachment was missing and if I wan
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:28:02PM +0200, martin boeder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm using mutt since a long time ago and started to use pgp
> now. It works fine for me, except one thing: If I get an
> message with an attachment mutt shows me the attachment inline
> only. Like this
Hello,
As said in the subject, I have some issue with some attachment that I
get when wanting to save them. For instance, I get this:
./=?iso-8859-1?Q?Convocation_et_Agenda_Comit=E9_Strat=E9gique_2017.04.02?==?iso-8859-1?Q?_-_V2.pdf?=
We see that the 'é' became '=E9'
Hi!
Odd thing with an attachment, can someone advise?
My wife send me mail from aol.com with an attachment. when I received the
mail the attachment's filename was gibberish, NOT what she viewed
when she sent it:
Content-Type: application/pdf
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Dispos
Hallo mutt developers,
here is another small bug, if attachment name contains encoding info:
5 =?iso-8859-2?Q?inzer=E1t.txt?=
[text/plain, quoted, 0,9K]
6 scan.zip
[applica/x-zip
7;ve never had this problem it started last week
> when I recompiled mutt.
Do you mean the signature comes as an attachment to the main message?
There is nothing wrong with this, this is Mutt implementing the PGP/MIME
standard. See doc/PGP-Notes.txt that came with your distribution.
I'm not s
I mean that the message is also send as a attachment.
On Tue, Jul 06, 1999 at 12:03:06AM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> Please format your mails to be wrapped at 70-75 chars.
>
> Robin Gruyters [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > I've got a liltle problem. If I send a message (to
Robin --
...and then Robin Gruyters said...
%
% I mean that the message is also send as a attachment.
Well, technically, it's always an attachment, but usually the only one.
Once you have an attachment, you typically have the text body as another
attachment with a little blurb above it te
At 14:50 -0700 06 Aug 1999, Robert Chien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> emails. Would be nice if I can presss , and choose files
> or emails to attach. This is my wish list item.
Well, you can already choose files to attach with 'a'. Would you settle
for using 'A' (the default binding for the atta
At 5:50 PM EDT on August 6 Robert Chien sent off:
> Sometimes I need to forward one or more emails to another
> worker as attachment(s). How do I do that in mutt?
Tag the messages you want to forward then ";f" (tag-forward) will put
them all in your editor for sending. If
Hi!
On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 02:50:11PM -0700, Robert Chien wrote:
> If I save it to a file, then attach that file, it sort of
> works but takes a lot of time, esp. if I'm attaching 3+
> emails. Would be nice if I can presss , and choose files
> or emails to attach. This is my wish list item.
Alm
Robert Chien [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Sometimes I need to forward one or more emails to another
> worker as attachment(s). How do I do that in mutt?
>
> If I save it to a file, then attach that file, it sort of
> works but takes a lot of time, esp. if I'm attaching 3+
>
On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 02:50:11PM -0700, Robert Chien wrote:
> Sometimes I need to forward one or more emails to another
> worker as attachment(s).
> If I save it to a file, then attach that file, it sort of
> works but takes a lot of time, esp.
I learned something from the ans
Hi,
I was wondering, is there a way to use mutt on the command line to
extract an attachment from an email? What I'm trying to do is have a
script that will save to a predefined directory all attachments
included in a mail piped through it.
Any other tool that will do this for me maybe
> I do it?
If you forward from the attachements menu , you'll get
just the attachment. (To forward more than one, first tag those you
wish to forward).
You may find it useful to review the variables "forward_attachment",
"forward_decode" to see what affect, if any, t
On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 06:54:30AM -0700, David Ellement wrote:
>
> You may find it useful to review the variables "forward_attachment",
forward_attachment: unknown variable
that I want to forward just the word document to someone. How do
> I do it?
>
> I tried $mime_forward, but that made the whole original email one attachment,
> and I couldn't see how to remove the parts I didn't want to forward.
>
> Tried starting a new message, using
l attachments. Say one is a word document (yea,
>> people like to send me word documents that contain one paragraph...) and
>> further say that I want to forward just the word document to someone. How do
>> I do it?
>>
>> I tried $mime_forward, but that made the whol
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 11:04:39AM -0700, Todd Strilchuk wrote:
>
> hmmm... i tried that with my version of mutt (0.95.6us) and it
> wouldn't include certain attachements in my message. for example,
> someone sent me a jpg file which i tried to forward on to someone
> else. i did the view attac
; >> This is probably a silly question...
> >>
> >> I get an email that has several attachments. Say one is a word document (yea,
> >> people like to send me word documents that contain one paragraph...) and
> >> further say that I want to forward just the
hmm strange. i tried a mix with 2 text files and one jpg file
and it worked fine.
also Mutt 1.0pre3us (1999-09-25).
jan
7bit, 0.1K]
4 tq>one.bmp [applica/octet-stre, base64, 86K]
5 mq>two.bmp [applica/octet-stre, base64, 86K]
I tagged just two.bmp, did ;f and sent it to myself. It looked like a
single attachment when I sent it. Here's the me
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 02:41:23AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> It's not that of a deal, but there are times when I don't really want
> the original headers traveling in my forward. Ideas?
>
Sorry, i have no idea! I noticed the same behaviour and didnt really
like it either
Maybe Jere
Jan Houtsma [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 02:41:23AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > It's not that of a deal, but there are times when I don't really want
> > the original headers traveling in my forward. Ideas?
> >
>
> Sorry, i have no idea! I noticed the sam
On Fri, Oct 22, 1999 at 03:16:24PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
>
> Erm, I haven't been reading this thread, but is there a reason
> $forward_weed doesn't work for you?
>
my forward_weed is set.
Reply-To:
Hi,
I've been having some annoying things happen in Mutt that I was wondering if someone
with more experience could help me solve.
First, I am in several mailing lists (this one included) where, when I press 's' to
save the message, Mutt offers to save it in a file named whatever th
Would changing your umask work?
On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 06:35:34PM +0100, Struan Donald wrote:
> Is there some way that I can change these from the current 600 to
> something less restrictive? I looked through the manual and there
> doesn't seem to be any option in there for changing them.
>
> t
Corey G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Thu, 04 May 2000:
> Would changing your umask work?
Probably not, my umask is 022 and Mutt still creates new folders and
saved files with mode 600. I think it's a security precaution and a
good default, since usually you do not want other people reading your
On Fri, May 05, 2000 at 02:59:01AM +0300, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
> Corey G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Thu, 04 May 2000:
> > Would changing your umask work?
>
> Probably not, my umask is 022 and Mutt still creates new folders and
> saved files with mode 600. I think it's a security precaution a
Hi,
I'm curious why Mutt would set the Content-Disposition: attachment for a
text/plain message, replying to a text/plain message. Here's the relevant
headers from the outgoing message as saved by Mutt in my Sent folder:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-asc
I sometimes have to send a message with a very large attachment, e.g. in
excess of 2 meg. I'd like to sent a cc of this message WITHOUT the
attachment to another recipient. Is there a way I can do this?
TIA
--
John P. Verel
Norwalk, CT
. You could then
print from your editor.
I hear that a lot of improvements have been made to the development
version of w3m and that there will be another release soon. Maybe
printing will be among them.
Regarding trying to print an HTML attachment from within mutt: if you
are literally pipi
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 04:05:38PM -0500 or so it is rumoured hereabouts,
Ken Weingold thought:
> In the attachment menu of an email I received, I hit 'd' on an
> attached jpeg, then 'q' to get back to the index. The messaged showed
> the lowercase 'd'
On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 06:41:05AM +0700, Efata wrote:
:
: I have fetch email from my friend with attachment file 2.8 MB. And I read
: this email with mutt and I view attachment and save it. But after I save the
: size change only 2M. It is right or not?
This is normal. Attachments are often
On 2001.07.10, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Eugene Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 06:41:05AM +0700, Efata wrote:
> :
> : I have fetch email from my friend with attachment file 2.8 MB. And I read
> : this email with mutt and I view
I have observed that while sending mails with a pdf attachment, the size of
the pdf attachment changes when it reaches
the destination.Sometimes(randomly).i am not able to open the pdf
attachment...gives an error like "error reading the document".
The attachment behaves differen
Is there a way to delete an attachment that one accidentally added? I noticed
this when I was attaching some files for a message. I accidentally selected
one, but couldn't figure out how to remove it. I ended up cancelling the message,
and then re-composing the message, making sure not to s
Hi everyone,
Is there a way of giving the gpg signiture a default name like
'nicks_electronic_signiture' or something equally as clear?
On some clients it's coming up labled the same as the subject and on
others, some weird default like 'attach0023'
Most confusing.
Thanks
--
Nick Wilson
Tel
Hi Nick,
the $p_o_c patch sets the header
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="msg.pgp"
which is why Outlook shows an attachment. There is a patch from Dale
Woolridge, which is supposed to take care of this, but I couldn't test
it yet. (So little time.) The URL is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Viktor Rosenfeld blurted
> Hi Nick,
>
> the $p_o_c patch sets the header
>
> Content-Disposition: inline; filename="msg.pgp"
>
> which is why Outlook shows an attachment. There is a patc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Nick Wilson blurted
> No, I mean $p_c_t (pgp_create_traditional) along with the outlook compat
> patch, Which is why I can't understand why she's getting both the
> message /and/ an attachment containing the mes
Nick --
...and then Nick Wilson said...
%
% * and then Nick Wilson blurted
% > No, I mean $p_c_t (pgp_create_traditional) along with the outlook compat
% > patch, Which is why I can't understand why she's getting both the
% > message /and/ an attachment containing the m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then David T-G blurted
>
> % thing :) I got the patch but can't seem to apply it. If anyone else has
> % experience of using it please help. Oterwise I'll post a seperate threas
> % for a little assistance.
>
> Keep us posted, because I w
Hi Nick,
Nick Wilson wrote:
> One of those days, You just made a typo, we /are/ talking about the same
> thing :) I got the patch but can't seem to apply it. If anyone else has
> experience of using it please help. Oterwise I'll post a seperate threas
> for a little assistance.
I just tested th
On 28-Jan-2002 23:39 Viktor Rosenfeld wrote:
|
| However, this is on a fresh mutt tarball (1.3.26i), and looking on the
| patch, I don't think it'll apply if you have the outlook_compat patch
| applied.
|
| This patch does exactly what I want with $p_c_t, it's perfekt.
In fact, the patch is
-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.
>
> However, this is on a fresh mutt tarball (1.3.26i), and looking on the
> patch, I don't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* and then Dale Woolridge blurted
> In fact, the patch is really meant as a replacment for the outlook_compat
> patch. Many people agree that outlook_compat is a misnomer, so I simply
and the confirmation. Great, at least it wasn't
-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
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
-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:
> Hmmm... Thanks Jeremy, that's getting results, unfortunately it's
> failing on each hunk?
What output?
msg23953/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-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
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 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
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
-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 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
| >
101 - 200 of 640 matches
Mail list logo
