Re: Thunderbird not visible
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Thunderbird not visible
- From: Paul Scott <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 11:55:14 -0700
- Message-id: <20050910185513.GA26655@localhost>
- In-reply-to: <431A84BB.email@example.com>
- References: <20050903180744.GB5863@localhost> <431A84BB.firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 10:23:07PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> email@example.com wrote:
> > I seem to have gotten most important things to work. One thing I
> > miss that I need is a quick way to set the From: field since I
> > have three different email addresses that I send messages from.
> > With Thunderbird the From: address was set automatically
> > correctly depending which folder I was in. Using Esc-F still
> > requires that I type the complete address.
> Ungh, one of the most bass-ackwards things that test mailers still cling
> to after two decades. The antiquated notion that people want to merge all
> their mail from different addresses into a single stream only to jump through
> a dozen or so hoops to split it back out. Whole reason I don't use mutt.
That's been my main reason, too. Also after using mutt for a few weeks the
other reason is T-Bird's display is much much more readable. I have tried a
number of fonts with mutt and it doesn't really help.
I will still continue to use mutt on my old (P-90) laptop.
> not keen on setting folder-hooks for every folder I ever create without a
> single notion of inheritance of settings. Even worse is trying to keep all
> the outbound mail separate. *shudder*
> Seriously, what problems are you having with TBird? Let's get that
> running so you don't have to suffer the horrors of an MUA stuck in the 1990s.
It runs but nothing appears on the screen. I have found nothing relevant in logs
or anything with Google. TIA for any diagnostic thoughts.
> > Another important feature that I haven't found yet is a good way
> > to filter messages automatically. It looks like the 'mailbox' is
> > part of the answer.
> Mutt doesn't filter. Exim does. Ignore the inevitable "procmail rawks!"
> people who spawn from the woodwork any time "mutt" and "filter" are uttered in
> the same message together. Exim filters. Exim's filter language doesn't look
> like line noise from a 9600 USRobotics on a phone line routed through Pango
> Pango. Why run an additional program when then MTA does it just fine?
> Peruse exim.org's documentation, esp. the portion marked "filter
> specification". I use Exim's filtering here because Thunderbird does not
> filter IMAP accounts. :(
Thanks. I've been too busy to do this yet but hope to soon.