On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 09:01:00AM -0800, Gary Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 05:46:09AM -0500, David T-G wrote:
>
> > % > Said Aleks Owczarek on Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 02:38:08PM +1100:
> > % >
> > % > > convoluted process easier by adding a "forward-with-attachments"
> > % > > variable or am i missing something?????????
>
> > Please help me clarify... Is it the case that $mime_forward does not
> > work at all for you, or simply that you do not want to forward the
> > message, with its attachments, in its own single attachment container?
>
> OK, let me try to explain this by an example. Someone sends me a
> message with an attachment. Mutt's Attachments menu shows this:
>
> I 1 <no description> [text/plain, 7bit, us-ascii, 2.9K]
> A 2 a-book.pdf [applica/pdf, base64, 214K]
>
> Now I want to forward this message to someone else. I type 'f' and mutt
> asks me "Forward MIME encapsulated? ([n]/y):" to which I reply "n".
> Mutt starts my editor with the text/plain part of the message already in
> the editor so that I can easily refer to it or edit it if I choose.
> This is fine, but when I finish editing the message, I find that mutt
> has not included the attachment.
>
> So I try again. This time I reply "y" to "Forward MIME encapsulated?
> ([n]/y):". Now mutt starts my editor with nothing in it but my
> signature! The message I'm forwarding isn't there! Further, when I
> finish editing the message, I find that mutt has attached the entire
> forwarded message as one attachment, so I can't see the individual
> attachments nor can I view or delete them individually.
>
> I try a third time. I type 'v' to see the Attachment menu, type 't'
> twice to select both parts of the message, then type ';f' to forward
> both parts. After answering "n" to "Forward MIME encapsulated?
> ([n]/y):", mutt starts my editor with the text/plain part already there.
> Great! I finish editing and find that mutt has included the attachment
> in the message. Again great! This is exactly the behavior I want. But
> I want it as easily as I get the other forwarding behaviors, in one
> keystroke, maybe two.
>
> A macro would work fine, but there's no <tag-pattern> function in the
> Attachments menu.
>
> A quadoption would also work, like the 'forward-with-attachments'
> variable that Aleks suggested. "No" would get the current behavior;
> "yes" would get the behavior that a lot people seem to expect and want,
> to wit, typing 'f' does all the steps in my third try automatically.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Gary
>
> --
> Gary Johnson | Agilent Technologies
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Spokane, Washington, USA
> http://www.spocom.com/users/gjohnson/mutt/ |
oh yes oh yes oh yes!!!
Thanks Gary.
That is EXACTLY what I mean and from the discussions I have read on
this newsgroup's archives a lot of users would appreciate it.
--
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Aleks L. Owczarek
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
University of Melbourne, Vic, 3010, Australia.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
