[breen.mullins <at> gmail.com: Re: Mailing list reply]

This is a suggestion from mutt-users... anyone have any comments?

>> P.S. I've often thought something like an addr-hook, that forces 
>> specific addresses to be treated as something else (akin to a 
>> charset-hook, kinda) would be pretty useful, and such a thing would 
>> solve the problem here, as long as mutt eliminates duplicate 
>> recipients. For example:
>>
>>     addr-hook listname <at> mail.listname.com listname <at> listname.com
>
> Now _that's_ an interesting idea! I tend to get mails addressed to 
> collections of people - a church group, for example - where one 
> recipient has changed her address. (Old directories take a long time 
> to die.) With an addr-hook, I could make the change and a group 
> reply would go to the new address even if the message had only the 
> old address for that person. 

~Kyle
--

-- 
No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of 
another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.
                                      -- Thomas Jefferson, July 7, 1786

[Mutt] #2967: limit could be smarter about filtering

#2967: limit could be smarter about filtering

 {{{
 ----- Forwarded message from martin f krafft <madduck <at> debian.org> -----

 Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 12:25:18 +0100
 From: martin f krafft <madduck <at> debian.org>
 Reply-To: martin f krafft <madduck <at> debian.org>, 445821 <at> bugs.debian.org
 To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit <at> bugs.debian.org>
 Subject: Bug#445821: could be smarter about filtering

 Package: mutt
 Version: 1.5.16-3
 Severity: wishlist

 If I limit a mailbox with a pattern like '~L dato ~b mutt', then
 mutt could really just search the body of messages to or from dato.
 However, mutt searches all bodies.

 It would be nice if mutt could do a two-stage search and run
 expensive patterns only on the result of less-expensive patterns, so
 that in the above example, only messages to or from dato would be
 body-searched.
 }}}

--

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/2967>

Compatibility problem when calling mutt_pretty_size

Hi,

The third parameter to function mutt_pretty_size, defined as long, gets
a size argument.  From browser.c, function folder_format_str,
mutt_pretty_size is called with the st_size member of struct stat.  Per
POSIX, the st_size member is defined as off_t, and using long for file
sizes is not portable.  On some systems, off_t is defined as a 64 bit
type, while long is 32 bit.  This is the case for instance on Cygwin.
Or, on 32 bit Linux with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64.

Wouldn't it be better to change the third parameter to mutt_pretty_size
as an intmax_t and use the 'j' format specifier in calls to printf?  Ok,
I admit that mailbox sizes of more than 2 Gigs are rather seldom...

If you don't want to rely on intmax_t and the 'j' specifier being
available, there would also be the alternative to define the third
parameter as long long and use the lld format specifier.

The below patch, implementing the intmax_t approach, is against the
latest snapshot (20071008).

ChangeLog:

	* muttlib.c: Change third parameter of mutt_pretty_size to intmax_t.
	* protos.h: Change prototype accordingly.

--- muttlib.c.ORIG      2007-10-08 12:50:41.000000000 +0200
+++ muttlib.c   2007-10-08 12:51:28.000000000 +0200
@@ -812,7 +812,7 @@ void mutt_pretty_mailbox (char *s)
   }

patch etiquette

Hi All,

I'm wondering what the etiquette for submitting a patch to mutt is?
I've added a feature that scratches my one itch with mutt.  Can I just
submit the patch to this list?

Thanks
-Ben
--

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Walton <bdwalton <at> gmail.com>

When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When
many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.
Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[PATCH] pager_honours_reverse_sort

Hi All,

The attached patch adds the configuration variable
pager_honours_reverse_sort.  When true, this option will see the pager
skip to the previous (lower numbered) message in the list instead of
the next message.  I prefer to keep new mail at the top of the heap,
but the pager always goes to the next mail (typically older in my
case).  I've grown tired of using pager_stop and decided to hack this
change in.

I hope it's acceptable.

Thanks
-Ben
--

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Walton <bdwalton <at> gmail.com>

When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When
many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.
Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#diff -r 709db707bcdf init.h
--- a/init.h	Fri Sep 28 11:06:43 2007 +0200
+++ b/init.h	Fri Oct 05 16:57:58 2007 -0400
@@ -1398,6 +1398,13 @@ struct option_t MuttVars[] = {
   ** when you are at the end of a message and invoke the \fInext-page\fP

Re: patch etiquette

> I'm wondering what the etiquette for submitting a patch to mutt is?
> I've added a feature that scratches my one itch with mutt.  Can I just
> submit the patch to this list?

It's typical to post it here, with a [PATCH] subject.  It's easiest for
others if your patch is diffed from the tip of the mercurial repository,
or at worst the most recent 1.5 series release.  (Better yet if it's
generated using mercurial. :) But at any rate be sure to say what the
baseline code is.

If you're using mercurial, of course it's handy if you serve the repo.
But that's not expected or necessary.

--

-- 
 -D.    dgc <at> uchicago.edu    NSIT    University of Chicago
 "Polka music needs to prevail."   John Ziobrowski, Polka America Corporation

Re: [PATCH] pager_honours_reverse_sort

On Tuesday, October  9 at 03:21 PM, quoth Ben Walton:
>+		/* FIXME: Make this based on an option later */
>+		if (option (OPTPAGERHONOURSREVERSE) && Sort & SORT_REVERSE)
>+			rc = OP_MAIN_PREV_UNDELETED;
>+		else
>+			rc = OP_MAIN_NEXT_UNDELETED;

The comment here looks like cruft.

~Kyle
--

-- 
The price of freedom of religion, or of speech, or of the press, is 
that we must put up with a good deal of rubbish.
                                                      -- Robert Jackson

Re: [PATCH] pager_honours_reverse_sort

Yes.  Sorry about that.  Guess I forgot to do the cleanup.  I made the
behaviour optional after making it work.

I'll resubmit shortly.

Thanks
-Ben

On 10/9/07, Kyle Wheeler <kyle-mutt-dev <at> memoryhole.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday, October  9 at 03:21 PM, quoth Ben Walton:
> >+              /* FIXME: Make this based on an option later */
> >+              if (option (OPTPAGERHONOURSREVERSE) && Sort & SORT_REVERSE)
> >+                      rc = OP_MAIN_PREV_UNDELETED;
> >+              else
> >+                      rc = OP_MAIN_NEXT_UNDELETED;
>
> The comment here looks like cruft.
>
> ~Kyle
> --
> The price of freedom of religion, or of speech, or of the press, is
> that we must put up with a good deal of rubbish.
>                                                       -- Robert Jackson
>
>

--

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Walton <bdwalton <at> gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH] pager_honours_reverse_sort

Re-submitted.

Thanks
-Ben

On 10/9/07, Kyle Wheeler <kyle-mutt-dev <at> memoryhole.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday, October  9 at 03:21 PM, quoth Ben Walton:
> >+              /* FIXME: Make this based on an option later */
> >+              if (option (OPTPAGERHONOURSREVERSE) && Sort & SORT_REVERSE)
> >+                      rc = OP_MAIN_PREV_UNDELETED;
> >+              else
> >+                      rc = OP_MAIN_NEXT_UNDELETED;
>
> The comment here looks like cruft.
>
> ~Kyle
> --
> The price of freedom of religion, or of speech, or of the press, is
> that we must put up with a good deal of rubbish.
>                                                       -- Robert Jackson
>
>

--

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Walton <bdwalton <at> gmail.com>

When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When
many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.
Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

[PATCH] fix indent_string handling with format=flowed

Hi,

changeset:   5109:d3e0d6c60d87
branch:      HEAD
user:        Brendan Cully <brendan <at> kublai.com>
date:        Tue Apr 10 13:46:09 2007 -0700
summary:     Don't use $indent_string to quote replies to flowed messages (closes #2874).

introduced a regression when replying to format=flowed mails.
The patch below fixes it for me (patch is against hg tree),
but please review carefully -- I know next to nothing about
mutt internals.

(Note: It would make sense to ignore $indent_string if
$text_flowed is set. My patch doesn't address this as
I'm never creating format=flowed mails, I only have to
reply to them.)

BTW, I just noticed mutt crashes when I set indent_string="|"
(single pipe character) and try to reply to a message
(independent of my patch, also happens in Debian 1.5.16 package).

Thanks,
Johannes

diff -r 709db707bcdf rfc3676.c
--- a/rfc3676.c	Fri Sep 28 11:06:43 2007 +0200
+++ b/rfc3676.c	Wed Oct 10 17:30:05 2007 +0200
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ static void print_indent (int ql, STATE 
   int i;