headers
Marianne Promberger | 1 Oct 10:36
Picon

Can send-hook "set from" take precedence over reverse_name?

Dear mutt users,

I have

set reverse_name

I also have some send-hooks like this:

send-hook "~t domain.com" 'set from="My Name <address <at> domain.com>"'

Currently, if I reply to someone <at> domain.com, the "From" in the reply
gets set to whatever someone <at> domain.com sent it to, not to the line
specified in the send-hook. I.e., reverse_name takes precedence. This
happens no matter which of reverse_name or send-hook I put first in my
muttrc.

I would like the send-hooks to take precedence over reverse_name. Is
this possible?

Marianne

--

-- 
Marianne Promberger
http://promberger.info
GnuPG/PGP public key ID 80AD9916

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
James Michael Fultz | 1 Oct 11:03
Picon

Re: Can send-hook "set from" take precedence over reverse_name?

* Marianne Promberger <marianne.promberger <at> gmail.com> [2009-10-01 09:36 +0100]:
[...]
>send-hook "~t domain.com" 'set from="My Name <address <at> domain.com>"' 
> 
[...]
> 
>I would like the send-hooks to take precedence over reverse_name. Is 
>this possible? 

According to the manual, both my_hdr and $reverse_name override 
$from.  So looks you would have to use my_hdr in your send-hook.

send-hook "~t domain.com" 'my_hdr From: My Name <address <at> domain.com>'
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Joost Kremers | 2 Oct 14:20
Favicon

Regexps suddenly case-sensitive?

Hi all,

I recently upgraded from Slackware 12.2 to Slackware 13.0. I installed mutt
1.5.20 from source both on the old and on the new system. I copied over my mutt
config files to the new system, so they are identical.

For some reason, since I did the OS upgrade, mutt's regular expressions are
case-sensitive. I noticed this with several hooks that use regexps and also with
the variable reply_regexp, which all of a sudden doesn't match capitalized
"Re: " anymore, with the result that when I reply to a message, an additional
"Re: " is added to the subject line, even if it begins with "Re: " already. I
hadn't changed it from the default value, which always worked fine.

I changed reply_regexp to "^(Re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|Aw):[ \t]*", and then noticed
some more odd behaviour. If I'm in a remote IMAP mailbox, the regexp still
doesn't do its job. If I hit 'r' to reply to a message, an additional "Re: "
gets appended to the subject. But if I copy the message to a local mail box (all
mbox in my case) and reply from it there, suddenly it works and no extra "Re: "
is added.

Anyone have an idea what might be the cause of this? Like I said, I had no such
problem on slackware 12.2, it only started happening the past few days since the
upgrade, even though I'm running the same mutt version with the same config
files...

TIA

Joost

--

--
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
David Champion | 2 Oct 17:26
Favicon

Re: Regexps suddenly case-sensitive?

* On 02 Oct 2009, Joost Kremers wrote:
> For some reason, since I did the OS upgrade, mutt's regular
> expressions are case-sensitive. I noticed this with several hooks
> that use regexps and also with the variable reply_regexp, which all
> of a sudden doesn't match capitalized "Re: " anymore, with the result
> that when I reply to a message, an additional "Re: " is added to the
> subject line, even if it begins with "Re: " already. I hadn't changed
> it from the default value, which always worked fine.

A regex that is all lowercase matches insensitively.  A regex that
contains uppercase is case-sensitive.

> I changed reply_regexp to "^(Re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|Aw):[ \t]*", and then noticed

Use "^(re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*" and see whether the behavior
changes.

--

-- 
 -D.    dgc <at> uchicago.edu    NSIT    University of Chicago
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Omari Norman | 2 Oct 17:37

Re: Regexps suddenly case-sensitive?

On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 02:20:35PM +0200, Joost Kremers wrote:
> I recently upgraded from Slackware 12.2 to Slackware 13.0. I installed mutt
> 1.5.20 from source both on the old and on the new system.
> For some reason, since I did the OS upgrade, mutt's regular expressions are
> case-sensitive.

I had a similar problem. How did you complile the newer Mutt--did you
modify the Slackbuild? See

http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3341

which may nor may not help you...

--

-- 
You can't lose what you never had.
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Joost Kremers | 2 Oct 18:32
Favicon

Re: Regexps suddenly case-sensitive?

On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 10:26:28AM -0500, David Champion wrote:
> > I changed reply_regexp to "^(Re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|Aw):[ \t]*", and then noticed
> 
> Use "^(re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*" and see whether the behavior
> changes.

That's the default setting, which I had never changed, so it's the one that
causes the behaviour...

--

-- 
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Joost Kremers | 2 Oct 18:51
Favicon

Re: Regexps suddenly case-sensitive?

On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 11:37:34AM -0400, Omari Norman wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 02:20:35PM +0200, Joost Kremers wrote:
> > I recently upgraded from Slackware 12.2 to Slackware 13.0. I installed mutt
> > 1.5.20 from source both on the old and on the new system.
> > For some reason, since I did the OS upgrade, mutt's regular expressions are
> > case-sensitive.
> 
> I had a similar problem. How did you complile the newer Mutt--did you
> modify the Slackbuild?

I took the Slackbuild from the Slackware source tree for mutt 1.4.something. All
I changed was the version and build numbers in the Slackbuild, nothing else.

> See
> 
> http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3341
> 
> which may nor may not help you...

Thanks, it did. :-)

I first removed --enable-locales-fix and --without-wc-funcs, which solved the
problem for local mail boxes, but not for IMAP mail boxes. Then I removed
--enable-pop, and for some reason, now it works again in IMAP mail boxes as
well...

Why the POP3 code should have this effect is beyond me, but there it is...

--

-- 
Joost Kremers
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Javier Rojas | 7 Oct 02:43
Picon

filter sent mail

Hi all,

I have a problem with the mail I send: I'd like it to be filtered
by procmail, just like it is done with the mail I receive, mostly to get
it in the proper mailbox, to get threaded mail.

I've tried two approaches to get a solution to this:

  - Configure mutt to keep a copy of the sent mail in the current
    mailbox. Sucks because I must remember to place myself in the proper
    mailbox before writing the mail, instead of just hitting 'm' and
    writing it.

  - Send a copy to myself, through the Bcc header. Works, but sucks
    because of wasted bandwith, and because the message I just wrote
    becomes new mail, which is a hassle.

What I'd like, again, is just that the mail I send also gets filtered
according to the procmail rules I use to sort my incoming mail.

Any ideas on how to solve this? I feel this is a pretty basic issue but
I haven't found much about how to handle it. I also feel this isn't
directly mutt-related, but I hope you can shed some light on this.

Thanks!

--

-- 
Javier Rojas

GPG Key ID: 0x24E00D68
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
James Michael Fultz | 7 Oct 04:39
Picon

Re: filter sent mail

* Javier Rojas <jerojasro <at> devnull.li> [2009-10-06 19:43 -0500]:
> I have a problem with the mail I send: I'd like it to be filtered
> by procmail, just like it is done with the mail I receive, mostly to get
> it in the proper mailbox, to get threaded mail.
[...]
> Any ideas on how to solve this? I feel this is a pretty basic issue but
> I haven't found much about how to handle it. I also feel this isn't
> directly mutt-related, but I hope you can shed some light on this.

As a solution within Mutt, have you tried fcc-hooks?

<http://www.mutt.org/doc/devel/manual.html#fcc-hook>
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Javier Rojas | 7 Oct 06:57
Picon

Re: filter sent mail

On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 10:39:08PM -0400, James Michael Fultz wrote:
> As a solution within Mutt, have you tried fcc-hooks?
> 
> <http://www.mutt.org/doc/devel/manual.html#fcc-hook>

No, but if I read that correctly, I would have to duplicate all of my
procmail filters into mutt.

--

-- 
Javier Rojas

GPG Key ID: 0x24E00D68
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane