Re: mutt, spamcop, and vi: header weeding
On Fri 22 Dec 06, 10:24 AM, Toby <tobia.conforto@xxxxxxxx> said:
> Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> > So I did this:
> >
> > set my_spamcop='p@xxxxxxxxx'
> > macro pager F ":set noweed\n<forward-message>$my_spamcop\n:\set weed\n"
> > send-hook . 'set signature="~/.sig"'
> > send-hook $my_spamcop 'unset signature ; set mime_forward ; set
> > editor=/bin/true; push y'
> > fcc-hook $my_spamcop /dev/null
> >
> > to take a look at what spamcop would receive. Unfortunately, the
> > headers were weeded. :(
>
> Why is there a backslash before "set weed" there?
LOL!!! You have good eyes! OK. I fixed it:
set my_spamcop='p@xxxxxxxxx'
macro pager F ":set noweed\n<forward-message>$my_spamcop\n:set weed\n"
send-hook . 'set signature="~/.sig"'
send-hook $my_spamcop 'unset signature ; set mime_forward ; set
editor=/bin/true; push y'
fcc-hook $my_spamcop /dev/null
Unfortunately, the headers were still weeded.
From p@xxxxxxxxx Sat Dec 23 15:28:46 2006
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 15:28:46 -0500
To: p@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [limpfabrications@xxxxxxxxxxxx: RE: King Insider Information]
From: Peter Jay Salzman <p@xxxxxxxxx>
[-- Attachment #1 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0K --]
[-- Attachment #2 --]
[-- Type: message/rfc822, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 2.4K --]
From: Minerva King <limpfabrications@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: p@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: King Insider Information
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 04:52:49 +0480
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
Do not miss this chance!
> set my_spamcop='p@xxxxxxxxx'
> macro pager F ":set noweed\n<forward-message>$my_spamcop\n"
> send-hook . 'set signature="~/.sig"'
> send-hook $my_spamcop 'unset signature; set mime_forward;
> set editor=/bin/true; push y; set weed'
> fcc-hook $my_spamcop /dev/null
That's a great idea! So I implemented:
set my_spamcop='p@xxxxxxxxx'
macro pager F ":set noweed\n<forward-message>$my_spamcop\n"
send-hook . 'set signature="~/.sig"'
send-hook $my_spamcop 'unset signature ; set mime_forward ; set
editor=/bin/true; push y; set weed'
fcc-hook $my_spamcop /dev/null
Unfortunately, the headers were still weeded:
From p@xxxxxxxxx Sat Dec 23 15:34:11 2006
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 15:34:11 -0500
To: p@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [May@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: Is Tease]
From: Peter Jay Salzman <p@xxxxxxxxx>
[-- Attachment #1 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0K --]
[-- Attachment #2 --]
[-- Type: message/rfc822, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 16K --]
From: bum <May@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "mailer-daemon"mailer-daemon@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Is Tease
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 16:40:24 +0800
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
[-- Attachment #1 --]
[-- Type: multipart/alternative, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 6.2K --]
Any more ideas?
Do you have any idea why this is happening anyhow? Aren't these directives
processed by mutt in the order which they are specified?
Thanks for helping! :-)
Pete
--
How VBA rounds a number depends on the number's internal representation.
You cannot always predict how it will round when the rounding digit is 5.
If you want a rounding function that rounds according to predictable rules,
you should write your own.
-- MSDN, on Microsoft VBA's "stochastic" rounding function
Peter Jay Salzman, email: p@xxxxxxxxx web: http://www.dirac.org/p
PGP Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D