<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: Mixmaster



On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 08:45:34AM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 2007-12-03 13:05:19 +1100, Brian Salter-Duke wrote:
> 
> > A long time ago, around the end of 2000 according to my
> > notebooks, I was involved in using mixmaster and making some code
> > and documentation changes which I believe Thomas included. I have
> > not used it since then and have no intention of doing so. I now
> > see no need for it. However, out of curiosity, I have had a look
> > at the situation briefly.
> 
> I haven't used mixmaster since, either, and have no intention of
> using it any time soon, either.
> 
> > Is anyone using mixmaster with mutt? If not, perhaps it should be
> > removed from the code. If it is not to be removed, the code
> > should certainly be changed to work with version 3.0.
> 
> +1
> -- 
> Thomas Roessler   <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

When we talked last about this, Thomas, there seemed to be very few
users of mixmaster/mutt. It does not look as if that situation has 
changed. I really do think we should delete it from the code. I'll 
ask around on the main list and the usenet group etc. Meanwhile, the 
manual says this:-

4.3. Sending anonymous messages via mixmaster.

   You may also have configured mutt to co-operate with Mixmaster, an
   anonymous remailer. Mixmaster permits you to send your messages
   anonymously using a chain of remailers. Mixmaster support in mutt is
   for mixmaster version 2.04 (beta 45 appears to be the latest) and
   2.03. It does not support earlier versions or the later so-called
   version 3 betas, of which the latest appears to be called 2.9b23.

That was at 1.5.15. I do not suppose it has chnaged since then. I think
it should read:-

4.3. Sending anonymous messages via mixmaster.

   You may also have configured mutt to co-operate with Mixmaster, an
   anonymous remailer. Mixmaster permits you to send your messages
   anonymously using a chain of remailers. Mixmaster support in mutt is
   for mixmaster version 2.03 or 2.04 (beta 46 appears to be the latest 
   from September 2002). There is no evidence version 46 has been tested. 
   It does not support newer version 3 betas. The latest is 3.0rc1.

Is that OK? Could someone add it to the current version of the manual?

Brian.

-- 
"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for
reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed."
                                               -- Albert Einstein   
Brian Salter-Duke (Brian Duke) Email: b_duke(AT)bigpond(DOT)net(DOT)au