On 2003-12-16 03:14:40 -0500, David Yitzchak Cohen wrote: > I'm starting to think that coloring messages should be done by a > display_filter rather than Mutt itself, since these types of > filtering ops shouldn't really have to mess with control > characters ... I guess when you ask why I miss ELM, I have to > answer that it liked going to extremes to delegate functionality > to separate programs, whereas Mutt sometimes tries to do a tad > too much all by itself, IMHO. . . [-- not an attachment marker --] The colorizing is, in fact, done in the pager, which seems to be the proper place to do it. That also used to be the case for the "[--" lines -- with the problem that you wouldn't be able to distinguish a mutt-generated attachment marker from a user-generated one. This problem turns into a security issue when people become able to fake PGP output. The old work-around for this was to include a time stamp in the attachment marker for PGP output; the new work-around is to generate a cookie at mutt start-up (a time stamp turned into a pseudo-ANSI control sequence) which is included in the beginning of attachment marker lines, and understood by the pager. -- Thomas Roessler · Personal soap box at <http://log.does-not-exist.org/>.
Attachment:
pgpzhfZhjrw3B.pgp
Description: PGP signature