25-Mar-02 at 22:26, Matthias Weiss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
I'm subscribed to several mailing lists which are sent
to 2 mail accounts. I'm using fetchmail to retrieve the
mails that are then stored in /var/spool/mail/matthias.
Since the mails go to separate accounts anyway, why not fetch
begin quoting what Simon White said on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 09:55:29AM +:
I didn't think this list could be posted to by non members. I am now
going to have to find your address and copy-paste it up to the CC line.
No, you don't have to. You choose to.
Many people wouldn't.
IMHO,
* Matthias Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-26 06:50]:
I'm subscribed to several mailing lists which are sent
to 2 mail accounts. I'm using fetchmail to retrieve the
mails that are then stored in /var/spool/mail/matthias.
I'd like mutt to check whether a mail came from a mailing
list and
26-Mar-02 at 10:30, Shawn McMahon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
I didn't think this list could be posted to by non members. I am now
going to have to find your address and copy-paste it up to the CC line.
No, you don't have to. You choose to.
Well, because I didn't read that line until the
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 04:40:23:PM +0100 Sven Guckes wrote:
* Matthias Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-26 06:50]:
Then I have a question regarding address books -
is there support for something alike in mutt??
use addressbook
I recommend using 'lbdb' ('little brother database').
26-Mar-02 at 19:26, Matthias Weiss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
Since the mails go to separate accounts anyway, why not fetch the mail to
two separate folders, and configure mutt to read both?
What do I gain from this when I have 3 mailing list on one and another 4 lists
on the other
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 09:55:29AM +, Simon White wrote:
25-Mar-02 at 22:26, Matthias Weiss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
I'm subscribed to several mailing lists which are sent
to 2 mail accounts. I'm using fetchmail to retrieve the
mails that are then stored in /var/spool/mail/matthias.
begin quoting what Matthias Weiss said on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 07:26:43PM +0100:
What do I gain from this when I have 3 mailing list on one and another 4 lists
on the other account?
The ability to use mailing lists to help you solve problems without
committing ettiquette errors that cause
* Matthias Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-26 19:11]:
What do I gain from this when I have 3 mailing list
on one and another 4 lists on the other account?
IMAP
I'd like mutt to check whether a mail came from a mailing
list and display only those mail at ones that belong to
the same
Hi!
I have a question if I can do the following with mutt.
I'm subscribed to several mailing lists which are sent
to 2 mail accounts. I'm using fetchmail to retrieve the
mails that are then stored in /var/spool/mail/matthias.
I'd like mutt to check whether a mail came from a mailing
list and
Moin,
* Matthias Weiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] [02-03-25 22:26]:
I'm subscribed to several mailing lists which are sent
to 2 mail accounts. I'm using fetchmail to retrieve the
mails that are then stored in /var/spool/mail/matthias.
I'd like mutt to check whether a mail came from a mailing
list and
1. I agree that this is a good compromise for the need of sorting for
index.
* 2. And I concern a pre-mentioned sorting need - about file browser. We
need at least two levels: folder/file and then name. Could this be
considered to improve at the same time?
3. About qsort, (I don't know
I know you csan do it like this, but it adds an extra function call to
the common case: right now we get by with just one function call except
when the primary sort doesn't match.
Another thing we could do is combine all the sort methods into one big
function with a loop and a case statement.
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 02:40:48PM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
I guess what I'm looking for is a way to sort by thread/subject/date
rather than just thread/subject. It doesn't look like I can use sort
and sort_aux to do this. Anyone have a suggestion for some other way to
accomplish
On Feb 06, Christian Ordig [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 02:40:48PM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
I guess what I'm looking for is a way to sort by thread/subject/date
rather than just thread/subject. It doesn't look like I can use sort
and sort_aux to do this.
I guess what I'm looking for is a way to sort by thread/subject/date
rather than just thread/subject. It doesn't look like I can use sort
and sort_aux to do this. Anyone have a suggestion for some other way to
accomplish this (other than just using procmail to put these things in a
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 10:25:43AM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
sort=thread
sort_aux=subject
sort_aux2=date
implying a fixed number of sort criteria, just more than are
available now. Second:
sort=thread/subject/date
implying an arbitrary number of sort criteria.
I
I think a fixed maximum number would be easier to handle the question
is just _which_ number this should be. Imagine a mixture of your and
my scenery ... this could result in something like:
sort=thread
sort_aux=score
sort_aux2=subject
sort_aux3=date
or
is just _which_ number this should be. Imagine a mixture of your and
my scenery ... this could result in something like:
sort=thread
sort_aux=score
sort_aux2=subject
sort_aux3=date
No, no, that syntax is all wrong.
I suggest
sort=thread
sort_aux=score
sort_aux_aux=subject
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 10:25:43AM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
sort=thread/subject/date
Aside from the (IMHO good) sense of the multiple sort fields just one
comment to the original poster. Even if implemented, I think your
problem wouldn't be solved.
When sorting by
Aside from the (IMHO good) sense of the multiple sort fields just one
comment to the original poster. Even if implemented, I think your
problem wouldn't be solved.
When sorting by thread/subject/date the subject has to be the same for
sub-sorting by date. But in your case the subjects are
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 05:53:07PM +0100, Christian Ordig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 10:25:43AM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
sort=thread
sort_aux=subject
sort_aux2=date
implying a fixed number of sort criteria, just more than are
available now.
I've been planning to do this for a while.
It seems to me that the only time that more than two levels of sorting
is useful is when the first level is threads. If anyone can give me a
plausible scenario where they'd want more than three, or more than two
unthreaded, I'll think about my
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 10:25:43AM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Which is more likely to be implemented? (I'm thinking there must have
been a reason for only allowing two criteria in the first place, and it
might have been to avoid the complexity of dealing with an
threads=forward
threads=reverse
or
threads=off
and then sort and sort_aux are what's used for secondary and tertiary
sorting, or primary and secondary if threads=off. Make sense to people?
I agree, and that would work for me.
KEN
msg24242/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Daniel Eisenbud [EMAIL PROTECTED] said something to this effect on
02/06/2002:
I've been planning to do this for a while.
It seems to me that the only time that more than two levels of
sorting is useful is when the first level is threads. If
anyone can give me a plausible scenario where
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 01:31:55PM -0500, darren chamberlain
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel Eisenbud [EMAIL PROTECTED] said something to this effect on
02/06/2002:
I've been planning to do this for a while.
It seems to me that the only time that more than two levels of
sorting is
On Feb 06, Daniel Eisenbud [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
I've been planning to do this for a while.
It seems to me that the only time that more than two levels of sorting
is useful is when the first level is threads. If anyone can give me a
plausible scenario where they'd want more than
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 02:20:34PM -0600, Jeremy Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Feb 06, Daniel Eisenbud [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
I've been planning to do this for a while.
It seems to me that the only time that more than two levels of sorting
is useful is when the first level is
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 12:10:34PM -0500, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
I suggest
sort=thread
sort_aux=score
sort_aux_aux=subject
sort_aux_aux_aux=date
sort_aux_aux_aux_aux=...
*g* that was also my first intension ... but _who_ the hell
should count all the _aux ? :-))
--
Christian Ordig
Germany
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 01:13:13PM -0500, Daniel Eisenbud wrote:
and then sort and sort_aux are what's used for secondary and tertiary
sorting, or primary and secondary if threads=off. Make sense to people?
I think it would do it. (at least for me :-)
--
Christian Ordig
Germany
I generally want to sort my folders by thread/date, so I use this:
folder-hook . set sort=threads
folder-hook . set sort_aux=date-received
However, I have a folder called debian-general, into which I have
procmail place everything from a few different Debian mailing lists.
In this folder,
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 02:40:48PM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
I guess what I'm looking for is a way to sort by thread/subject/date
rather than just thread/subject. It doesn't look like I can use sort
and sort_aux to do this. Anyone have a suggestion for some other way to
accomplish
Oliver Groschopp [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
my mutt-users mailbos has over 3000 mails. I want to move all mails
from 1999 in mutt-users-1999.
Is there a way (Perl-Script, ...)?
If you've got a reasonably fast auto-repeat on your keyboard, it's
probably quickest to just sort the mailbox by date and
34 matches
Mail list logo
