Todd Zullinger | 1 Dec 04:44 2006
Picon

Attachment reminders

Hi all,

As happens to me every so often, I sent out a message today where I
meant to attach a file but after editing I was too quick hitting send.
This doesn't happen frequently, but it still got me looking at ways to
make it happen even less.

To that end I poked on the wiki and found
http://wiki.mutt.org/?ConfigTricks/CheckAttach.

I would implement something like this, but it wouldn't do me a lot of
good when the message that I'm sending is encrypted as grepping for
attach in the message body tends to fail for encrypted text. :)  [This
was the case today that spurred my interest.]

My next thought was to do something similar except using $editor for
the attachment checking script instead of $sendmail.  This too has
limitations and I'm wondering if it's possible to overcome them.

I have editor set to a script that first calls my real editor and then
greps the message after the editor exits.  If the message contains the
regex '\battach' it will spit out a reminder to actually attach a
file.

Is there a way to call the attach-file function automatically instead
of just printing a nag?

Is there a way to check if I've already attached a file and skip the
nag and or attach-file call?

(Continue reading)

Cameron Simpson | 1 Dec 10:21 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: Attachment reminders

On 30Nov2006 22:44, Todd Zullinger <tmz <at> pobox.com> wrote:
| As happens to me every so often, I sent out a message today where I
| meant to attach a file but after editing I was too quick hitting send.
| This doesn't happen frequently, but it still got me looking at ways to
| make it happen even less.
| To that end I poked on the wiki and found
| http://wiki.mutt.org/?ConfigTricks/CheckAttach.
| 
| I would implement something like this, but it wouldn't do me a lot of
| good when the message that I'm sending is encrypted as grepping for
| attach in the message body tends to fail for encrypted text. :)  [This
| was the case today that spurred my interest.]
| 
| My next thought was to do something similar except using $editor for
| the attachment checking script instead of $sendmail.  This too has
| limitations and I'm wondering if it's possible to overcome them.
| 
| I have editor set to a script that first calls my real editor and then
| greps the message after the editor exits.  If the message contains the
| regex '\battach' it will spit out a reminder to actually attach a
| file.
| 
| Is there a way to call the attach-file function automatically instead
| of just printing a nag?

Well, you can queue an attachment from _inside_ the editor.
If you have edit_headers=yes you can add a header. Adding an "Attach:"
header with a file pathname will cause mutt to attach it when you save
and exit the editor.

(Continue reading)

George | 1 Dec 14:06 2006
Picon
Picon

Format=Flowed

I've just noticed that messages generated by Mozilla, Apple Mail and a
few others that employ this format appear a bit odd when viewed in mutt.
Specifically, any spaces in the indent string are removed from the
display, so we see

>Someone said this
>and that.

instead of 

> Someone said this
> and that.

which is what exists in the message.  A minor issue, perhaps, but less
than optimal when trying to slog through the typically poorly-formatted
messages found on most mailing lists.

My question is whether this is a bug, a feature, or whether I should go
ahead and remove the format=flowed parameter from the Content-Type
header for all such emails, and call it a day.

Thanks.

--

-- 
George

William Yardley | 1 Dec 18:04 2006
Picon

Re: Format=Flowed

On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 05:06:12AM -0800, George wrote:

> I've just noticed that messages generated by Mozilla, Apple Mail and a
> few others that employ this format appear a bit odd when viewed in mutt.
> Specifically, any spaces in the indent string are removed from the
> display, so we see

You could try Gary Johnson's stuff_all_quoted patch... I have a copy
that should apply against 1.5.13  <at> 
http://veggiechinese.net/patch-1.5.12.gj.stuff_all_quoted.3

(not sure if there's a patch for 1.4.x, which it looks like you're using)

There has been some discussion on the developers list about this
recently, but there was a lot of debate about some of the specifics of
implementing it in an actual release.

w

Gary Johnson | 1 Dec 18:08 2006

Re: Format=Flowed

On 2006-12-01, George <d1945 <at> sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I've just noticed that messages generated by Mozilla, Apple Mail and a
> few others that employ this format appear a bit odd when viewed in mutt.
> Specifically, any spaces in the indent string are removed from the
> display, so we see
> 
> >Someone said this
> >and that.
> 
> instead of 
> 
> > Someone said this
> > and that.
> 
> which is what exists in the message.  A minor issue, perhaps, but less
> than optimal when trying to slog through the typically poorly-formatted
> messages found on most mailing lists.
> 
> My question is whether this is a bug, a feature, or whether I should go
> ahead and remove the format=flowed parameter from the Content-Type
> header for all such emails, and call it a day.

The structure of format=flowed messages is specified by RFC 3676.  
It states that when a format=flowed message in interpreted, any 
leading '>' characters are to be counted to determine quoting depth 
and logically deleted.  Then if the first character of any line is a 
space, that line was space-stuffed and that space is to be logically 
deleted.  What remains is the actual text of the message.

How a mail client formats that text for presentation is left to the 
(Continue reading)

Cameron Simpson | 1 Dec 22:30 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: wich settings for using firefox with mutt ?

On 21Nov2006 00:36, Bob Proulx <bob <at> proulx.com> wrote:
| mess-mate wrote:
| > Bob Proulx <bob <at> proulx.com> wrote:
| > | > |   /home/mes-mate/firefox/firefox /tmp/somehtmlfile.html
| > | Is mozilla launched when you try the above?
| > YES.. firefox is launched, also when mozilla  is running;
| 
| You say yes that mozilla is launched when you invoke firefox which
| says that this cannot be related to mutt or to mailcap.  It must be
| the firefox wrapper script.  Don't you agree?

Both the firefox and mozilla wrapper scripts probe for a running
mozilla/firefox, and if it's there will just ask that to open a new
window.

Turn turn off this annoying behaviour you can set the environment
variable MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1. So:

  env MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1 /home/mes-mate/firefox/firefox /tmp/somehtmlfile.html

Should do the trick.
--
Cameron Simpson <cs <at> zip.com.au> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

Ed Campbell's <ed <at> Tekelex.Com> pointers for long trips:
3. Stop and take a break before you really need it.

Jeff Kinz | 1 Dec 23:02 2006

muttrc file, user variables?

Hi All- I've been perusing the muttrc man page and I may be overlooking
something that I'm trying to find.

Does Mutt have anything like a user defined variable?

I'm trying to maintain a variable with a list of email lists in it so I
can use the subscribe command (and other things, I think) on that list.

Is this doable? or am I taking the wrong approach? is there a better
way?

Thanks.

--

-- 
This e-mail was created by voice dictation using Dragon's
NaturallySpeaking.  There may be errors, omissions, or additions
present.

Patrick Shanahan | 1 Dec 23:13 2006
Picon

Re: muttrc file, user variables?

* Jeff Kinz <jkinz <at> kinz.org> [12-01-06 17:04]:
> Does Mutt have anything like a user defined variable?

mutt has 'user-defined variables', but not for the version, 1.4.1i,
that you are using.  Upgrade to 1.5.13.  It may be in earlier versions,
but I do not know where it was added.

--

-- 
Patrick Shanahan                        Registered Linux User #207535
http://wahoo.no-ip.org                         <at>  http://counter.li.org
HOG # US1244711         Photo Album:  http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2

Kyle Wheeler | 1 Dec 23:41 2006
Picon

Re: muttrc file, user variables?


On Friday, December  1 at 05:13 PM, quoth Patrick Shanahan:
>* Jeff Kinz <jkinz <at> kinz.org> [12-01-06 17:04]:
>> Does Mutt have anything like a user defined variable?
>
>mutt has 'user-defined variables', but not for the version, 1.4.1i,
>that you are using.  Upgrade to 1.5.13.  It may be in earlier versions,
>but I do not know where it was added.

According to the ChangeLog, it was added on January 12th, 2006, so it 
was in 1.5.12 (which only came out July 14th, 2006).

There are some restrictions on the user defined variables. They all 
are required to begin with "my_", so you can do something like:

    set my_foo='some string'

But not:

    set newvariable='some string'

~Kyle
--

-- 
Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and 
have everyone else mirror it.
                                                     -- Linus Torvalds
George | 2 Dec 15:16 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: Format=Flowed

On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 09:08:13AM -0800, Gary Johnson wrote:
> On 2006-12-01, George wrote:
> > I've just noticed that messages generated by Mozilla, Apple Mail and
> > a few others that employ this format appear a bit odd when viewed in
> > mutt.  Specifically, any spaces in the indent string are removed
> > from the display, so we see
> > 
> > My question is whether this is a bug, a feature, or whether I should
> > go ahead and remove the format=flowed parameter from the
> > Content-Type header for all such emails, and call it a day.
> 
> The structure of format=flowed messages is specified by RFC 3676.  

For those not in the habit of reading RFCs, I'd recommend anyone reading
this message to at least have a quick read through of it.  Using the RFC
utility from http://www.dewn.com/rfc/ makes it painless if you haven't
yet rolled your own approach.

> I didn't like it, so I wrote a patch to "fix" it:
> 
>     http://www.spocom.com/users/gjohnson/mutt/patch-1.5.5.1.gj.stuff_all_quoted.3

My guess is that the only reason I noticed was that I was in the process
of reviewing my procmail recipes in an attempt to mitigate the
increasingly creative ways people have of mucking about with email
messages.  I wonder whether that desire to express a measure of
individuality isn't unlike the efforts of spammers to gain our
attention.  That said, unappealing is probably the appropriate term, but
in the context of reading more than a few daily emails from friends and
family, it's significant as readability becomes paramount. 
(Continue reading)


Gmane