G'day Michael, [I'm sending this back to the mutt list to see if anyone else has a thought or two...] * michael@xxxxxxxxxxxx <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [040729 18:47]: > > I use the following (can you find the reference to where I got it > > from???) > > > > ## PGP -- This converts from the old style PGP mail, to the MIME > > ## style that Mutt likes. This recipe is from > > ## doc/mutt/PGP-Notes.txt > > *sigh* I'll be darned. It's right there, and here I was digging > through the source code and everything. Argh! *Laughing* You'd not be human if you didn't miss what was sitting right in front of you. I know I do it all the time (it was only spell checking that made me realise that the location of the recipe was listed in it - previously I'd said something like "I've forgotten where this comes from!") :-) > > Of course there is the check-traditional-pgp option which is in the > > manual. > > Which doesn't seem to deal very well with encrypted messages for some > reason. gpg won't accept my passphrase even if spoon-fed when using > check-traditional-pgp. :( It wouldn't surprise me if it's something in > my configuration... Hmm... Not sure about that one. The "upgrades are good" suggestion would be to move to a GPG with the gpg-agent, however as I don't use it I can't really comment. > I did use Pine before, but having used Mutt for a while now I wouldn't > go back even if I got paid for it... there's something to be said for > having a decent MUA! I think we all would echo that sentiment. Cheers, S.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature