CentOS - Mar 2007 - Mutt (derived from: Anaconda Slides in "Other Than English")

On 3/27/07, Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at darkover.org>
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 06:07:48PM +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> > Not in my mutt >:)
> <...> but
> Mutt is defaulting that particular attachment to iso-8859-1 here

I am sorry, I couldn't understand the Mutt part. Does that mean you've
been using Mutt? :-)

How good is it?

Any comments on the differences (productivity, mail filtering, etc)
from the graphical mail clients? Why do you use it?

Thanks
Leonardo

Leonardo:

This is probably a little off-topic, but I use mutt to send attachments 
through email from a script.
( It's good for automatically generated files such as the results of a 
system backup, etc. )

I also have a nifty little utility that polls a certain network 
directory and picks up text files that are a certain format and sends 
them through email (with an optional attachment) -- this allows me to 
generate log files on a "legacy server" that will automatically be 
emailed, without worrying about figuring out how to automatically email 
something in Windows.

(I'd much rather implement something in Linux than Windows, given a choice.)


Leonardo Pinheiro wrote:
> On 3/27/07, Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at darkover.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 06:07:48PM +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
>> > Not in my mutt >:)
>
>> <...> but
>> Mutt is defaulting that particular attachment to iso-8859-1 here
>
>
> I am sorry, I couldn't understand the Mutt part. Does that mean
you've
> been using Mutt? :-)
>
> How good is it?
>
> Any comments on the differences (productivity, mail filtering, etc)
> from the graphical mail clients? Why do you use it?
>
> Thanks
> Leonardo
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

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

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 04:03:22PM -0300, Leonardo Pinheiro
wrote:
> On 3/27/07, Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at darkover.org> wrote:
> >On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 06:07:48PM +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> >> Not in my mutt >:)
> 
> ><...> but
> >Mutt is defaulting that particular attachment to iso-8859-1 here
> 
> I am sorry, I couldn't understand the Mutt part. Does that mean
you've
> been using Mutt? :-)
> 
> How good is it?
> 
> Any comments on the differences (productivity, mail filtering, etc)
> from the graphical mail clients? Why do you use it?
Well, you have lots of questions. Answering all in once:

1- 10 fingers are faster than 2 (keyboard versus mouse)
2- If you know regular expressions, you can do some pretty
   nice stuff with mutt
3- I never found an e-mail client that would give me 1 tenth of the
   productivity I have with mutt
4- My .muttrc file is VERY customized, result of at least 5 years.
   I also have some small patches I created for Mutt itself I use here.
   And I DON'T use Mutt 1.4. Mutt 1.5 is MUCH better.
   My Mutt patches are mostly regarding pgp/gnupg support.
5- My Mutt window is 80x54. Works great.
6- I use the internal pages (for displaying) and VIM for editing
7- Some trick with .mailcap are nice for viewing HTML messages, as well
   as vcards and other stuff. Here is a free sample:

text/html;w3m -O utf-8 -I %{charset} -dump %s;copiousoutput;nametemplate=%s.html

I use a fetchmail + procmail + mutt combo here, in case you are wondering.
My procmail rules are (again) very customized. I actually have started
mixing "screen" to this combo lately, which is great when I want
to access my mail remotely. 

Lets face it, Mutt default configuration sucks. It takes some time and
some learning to reach peak productivity. But it is very worth it.

And last, regarding Mutt (by its author):
"All mail clients suck. This one just sucks less.", circa 1995

- -- 
Rodrigo Barbosa
"Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur"
"Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGCXU4pdyWzQ5b5ckRAmOGAKCuPNVksVCNAJQrvxE3YAzBKLjl9gCggLDL
WIOSiK+zTeLiGYLWpshU10U=4UrP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Leonardo Pinheiro wrote:
> I am sorry, I couldn't understand the Mutt part. Does that mean
you've
> been using Mutt? :-)
> 
> How good is it?
Very. But you want to use the development version (1.5.14 at the
moment).
> Any comments on the differences (productivity, mail filtering, etc)
> from the graphical mail clients? Why do you use it?
Because it is the most versatile and configurable mail client which is
out there. I don't know of any other mail client coming close to the
features mutt has. Though it still stinks in some parts. As Michael
Elkins said 12 years ago:

``All mail clients suck.  This one just sucks less.'' -me, circa 1995

And that is just true. Still. 

But they really could release 1.6.x, as 1.4.x is just too old and misses
many imap features (and header caching) which 1.5.x already has.

Oh, before someone hits me: Yes, Gnus is the one mail client which can
do all the stuff mutt can't. But it needs Emacs as its operating system.

Ralph
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070328/8ca715cd/attachment.sig>