Re: hook conflicts...
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 04:11:25PM -0400, David Yitzchak Cohen wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 03:53:57PM EDT, Matt Price wrote:
>
> > more fundamentally: the "send-hook ." line trumps the folder-hooks,
> > doesn't it? At least so it seems to me. So my folder-hooks are
> > useless. Is there a way to modify things so this works approximately
> > like this:
> >
> > IF a send-hook paplies, use it,
> > ELSE IF folder-hook applies, use it,
> > ELSE use the default From: and signature settings
>
> Easy:
>
> folder-hook folder1 'send-hook sweetie "do sweetie stuff"; send-hook . "do
> folder1 stuff"'
> folder-hook folder2 'send-hook sweetie "do sweetie stuff"; send-hook . "do
> folder2 stuff"'
> folder-hook . 'send-hook sweetie "do sweetie stuff"; send-hook . "do default
> stuff"'
>
> This even allows you to fine tune which send-hooks you want to override
> by which folder-hooks (say, sending from a particular folder even to
> sweetie won't do sweetie stuff).
wicked! thanks.
ok, so the big question is solved. How about this problem though:
send-hook "~C^sugar\.pop@utoronto\.ca" 'set
signature=.mutt/sigs/signature_sweetie ; my_hdr From: Matt
<matt.price@utoronto.\ ca>'
what's wrong with this hook? From the manual, I would think it would
only match a message with sugar.pop@xxxxxxxxxxx as the ONLY recipient
(because of the ^). Instead, it matches all messages with
sugar.pop@... as ANY of the recipients. Or am I missing something?
I have also tried it without the ~C (which seems superfluous for a
send-hook) -- but this seemed to make no difference -- neither fixed
nor gave me a syntax error.
anyway, thx again...
m