On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 10:32:35AM -0500, Stephen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 04:59:52AM -0500 or thereabouts, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 09:53:33AM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
>
> > > Could you not just use emacs as the editor for mutt?
>
> > I am in the process of trying to get procmail to filter all posts
> > through the gnus function so that when I use mutt, the post is
> > de-uglified. I do not use emacs. and I do not want to edits posts in it,
> > but wish emacs to process the mail.
>
> Hi Kevin:
>
> I would be interested in this, if you manage to sort it out. :)
Hi Stephen,
This was an interesting diversion! I found #emacs on freenode and asked
the supplicants of RMS for a magic invocation and lo and behold I was
issued an answer: (this is it plus the procmail bits)
------.procmailrc snippet---
:0fh:
|emacs --batch --eval "(with-current-buffer
(get-buffer-create \"*Article*\")
(condition-case nil
(while t
(insert
(read-string \"\") \"\\n\"))
(error))
(gnus-outlook-deuglify-article t)
(princ (buffer-string)))"
-----------------------------
But so far, it has not changed an emails, at least as far as I can tell.
If anyone knows why or has a better function, let me know.
-Kev
--
| .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: |
| : :' : The Universal |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/|
| `. `' Operating System | go to counter.li.org and |
| `- http://www.debian.org/ | be counted! #238656 |
| my keysever: subkeys.pgp.net | my NPO: cfsg.org |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature