Re: Procmail

[Kyle Wheeler <kyle-mutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday, October  9 at 10:23 AM, quoth Rem P Roberti:
> Boy, I'm missing something here.  Ok...I did have the syntax wrong, 
> and now that I have the path to my mailboxes correctly stated in 
> .muttrc Mutt does indeed give me a message at the bottom of the 
> screen telling me that a message has arrived in the named folder.  

Excellent! Progress! :)

> However, I was under the impression that the incoming messages would 
> also be listed in the index.

... ummm, they are. When you view the contents of the folder they were 
delivered to.

Let me try to put this another way: mutt's index of messages is the 
index of a single folder. Mutt can only ever view messages from a 
single folder at a time. If you have new messages delivered to a 
folder you aren't looking at, mutt will happily inform you that there 
are new messages in that folder, but to see them you have to go view 
that folder. Mutt will not simply add them to the index of whatever 
folder you happen to be viewing currently, because to do so would be 
to misrepresent the contents of the folder you're currently viewing 
(and really, how would that play out, if mutt behaved the way you seem 
to be assuming it does? Would all new messages in your defined 
mailboxes listed in the indexes of EVERY folder that you view? How 
disconcerting would *that* be?!?).

This is the same behavior as virtually every other mail client in 
existence: if you establish a rule to automatically file mail away in 
a folder, by definition, it does not appear in your INBOX (if it did, 
what would be the point of filing it?).

> Otherwise, how would one get the chance to reply?

You go open up the folder containing the new mail, read the message, 
and reply to it; the same way you reply to all other mail.

> Also, is it possible to have the filtered messages placed in their 
> respective folders without all of the headers?

That's between you and your MDA (procmail), but in general, it 
depends. Some folder formats (e.g. mbox) rely on at least some of the 
headers existing. What would be the point of stripping off headers? 
Some misguided attempt to save a few bytes of storage?

~Kyle
- -- 
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that 
matter.
                                              -- Martin Luther King Jr.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Thank you for using encryption!

iD8DBQFHC798BkIOoMqOI14RAi+JAJ9JBZxPAOPfsiGKEzHgFTRWjZ46dACgv0uI
p41Uf4uk6YyfVtiMxktRsGI=
=H7Xk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----