Tim Gray | 1 Dec 16:16 2011

maildir_trash questions

I'd like to have maildir_trash=yes.  I'm running mutt pointed at local 
maildirs.  When I set the above option to yes, I can flag deleted 
messages just fine; the T flag gets set on the file.  However, I can't 
seem to actually purge them by any means.  Syncing the mailbox has no 
effect, even though I'm asked if I'd like to purge the deleted messages.  
Does anyone have any suggestions?  The only thing I can think of is to 
make a macro to move T flagged messages to a 'trash' box that I can 
clear out with a cron script.  However, it'd be nice if mutt could 
unlink T flagged messages itself...

Salve Håkedal | 1 Dec 20:31 2011
Picon

Local alternative to Re:

Hi

I'm Norwegian.
I'd like to have mutt put 'Sv:' instead of 'Re:' when I reply to
messages, but can't find how to do it.

By the way: any other Norwegians on this mailing list? (Any other
Norwegians using mutt at all?)

--

-- 
Salve

Ivo Engelhardt | 1 Dec 21:01 2011
Picon

Re: Local alternative to Re:

On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:31:21PM +0100, Salve Håkedal wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I'm Norwegian.
> I'd like to have mutt put 'Sv:' instead of 'Re:' when I reply to
> messages, but can't find how to do it.

Try this in you .muttrc:

set reply_regexp="^Sv:[ \t]*"

--

-- 
Ivo Engelhardt 

Derek Martin | 1 Dec 21:27 2011

Re: Local alternative to Re:

On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:31:21PM +0100, Salve Håkedal wrote:
> I'm Norwegian.
> I'd like to have mutt put 'Sv:' instead of 'Re:' when I reply to
> messages, but can't find how to do it.

Re: is not from English, it's from Latin (and therefore local to no
one, since it's a dead language), and if I recall correctly it is
actually specified in the RFCs.  Assuming I'm not wrong about that,
localization is inappropriate and Mutt is correct to force using Re:
in the subject line.  "Be lenient in what you accept, and strict in
what you emit."

--

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

Derek Martin | 1 Dec 21:29 2011

Re: Local alternative to Re:

On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 09:01:46PM +0100, Ivo Engelhardt wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:31:21PM +0100, Salve Håkedal wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > I'm Norwegian.
> > I'd like to have mutt put 'Sv:' instead of 'Re:' when I reply to
> > messages, but can't find how to do it.
> 
> Try this in you .muttrc:
> 
> set reply_regexp="^Sv:[ \t]*"

This controls what mutt sees as replies (so that it does not generate
"re: re: re: ..." subject lines), not what it uses itself for replies.

--

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

Derek Martin | 1 Dec 21:36 2011

Re: Local alternative to Re:

On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 02:27:54PM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:31:21PM +0100, Salve Håkedal wrote:
> > I'd like to have mutt put 'Sv:' instead of 'Re:' when I reply to
> > messages, but can't find how to do it.
> 
> Re: is not from English, it's from Latin (and therefore local to no
> one, since it's a dead language), and if I recall correctly it is
> actually specified in the RFCs.  

Indeed:

  http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2822.txt

  3.6.5. Informational fields
  [...]
  The "Subject:" field is the most common and contains a short string
  identifying the topic of the message.  When used in a reply, the
  field body MAY start with the string "Re: " (from the Latin "res",
  in the matter of) followed by the contents of the "Subject:" field
  body of the original message.  If this is done, only one instance of
  the literal string "Re: " ought to be used since use of other
  strings or more than one instance can lead to undesirable
  consequences.

--

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

(Continue reading)

Grant Edwards | 1 Dec 21:40 2011
Picon

Re: Local alternative to Re:

On 2011-12-01, Derek Martin <invalid <at> pizzashack.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:31:21PM +0100, Salve Hkedal wrote:
>> I'm Norwegian.
>> I'd like to have mutt put 'Sv:' instead of 'Re:' when I reply to
>> messages, but can't find how to do it.
>
> Re: is not from English, it's from Latin (and therefore local to no
> one, since it's a dead language),

Well, I suppose you could argue that it's more local to languages that
use the latin aphabet than those that don't, and among them even more
local to the romance or neo-latin launages.

> and if I recall correctly it is actually specified in the RFCs.

I don't see it in RFC822 -- not sure where else to look.

> Assuming I'm not wrong about that, localization is inappropriate and
> Mutt is correct to force using Re: in the subject line.  "Be lenient
> in what you accept, and strict in what you emit."

Personally, I don't care what people use as long as they don't start
piling up like this:

sv: re: sv: re: ax: er: tr: gq: The original subject here

That's really annoying...

--

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! Jesus is my POSTMASTER
(Continue reading)

Derek Martin | 1 Dec 21:44 2011

Re: Local alternative to Re:

On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:40:43PM +0000, Grant Edwards wrote:
> Personally, I don't care what people use as long as they don't start
> piling up like this:
> 
> sv: re: sv: re: ax: er: tr: gq: The original subject here

And that is exactly why it IS specified in RFC 2822.

--

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

Grant Edwards | 1 Dec 21:50 2011
Picon

Re: Local alternative to Re:

On 2011-12-01, Derek Martin <invalid <at> pizzashack.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:40:43PM +0000, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> Personally, I don't care what people use as long as they don't start
>> piling up like this:
>> 
>> sv: re: sv: re: ax: er: tr: gq: The original subject here
>
> And that is exactly why it IS specified in RFC 2822.

Doh!  Don't know why I was looking at 822 and not 2822...

--

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! Awright, which one of
                                  at               you hid my PENIS ENVY?
                              gmail.com            

Derek Martin | 1 Dec 22:49 2011

Re: Local alternative to Re:

On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 02:44:01PM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 08:40:43PM +0000, Grant Edwards wrote:
> > Personally, I don't care what people use as long as they don't start
> > piling up like this:
> > 
> > sv: re: sv: re: ax: er: tr: gq: The original subject here
> 
> And that is exactly why it IS specified in RFC 2822.

Incidentally, while looking this up, I ran across a post which
suggested that the intent behind specifying a specific string in the
RFC was that it made two related problems simple:  The first was the
one you brought up, and the second is that mail clients can simply
choose to *display* a localized version of 'Re:' instead of that
string.  The hueristic for doing so is greatly simplified if the token
is standardized and invariable.

Sadly, RFCs are very good at explaining WHAT to do (well, usually),
but very often completely fail to address WHY to do it.  I guess
they'd be too long if they explained everything...

--

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.


Gmane