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

Re: send-hook upon preceding To:



On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 07:00:19AM EST, Hanspeter Roth wrote:
>   On Feb 28 at 12:49, Hanspeter Roth spoke:

> > Ok. I append a somewhat stripped version which behaves the same as
> > of the reply-hooks.
> 
> Sorry, I forgot the attachment.
> 
> -Hanspeter

Okay, your config seemed reasonable, so I peeked in the source.
Sure enough, send.c readily confirms that send-hooks are only executed
after reply-hooks, with a short little comment indicating that you'll
have to use the ~Q pattern in your send-hook conditions (! ~Q) if you
don't want them clobbering your reply-hook settings.

HTH,
 - Dave

-- 
Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor?
It's simple, Skyler.  You've seen what food processors do to food, right?

Please visit this link:
http://rotter.net/israel

Attachment: pgpZ8jPZm53CN.pgp
Description: PGP signature