Re: mutt: compose message in new window [was: Re: Musings on debian-user list]
On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 06:13:31PM EDT, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Sat,01.Aug.09, 16:06:08, Chris Jones wrote:
>
> > > http://does-not-exist.org/mail-archives/mutt-users/msg14344.html
> >
> > The mutt-user archive seems to be broken - if you display this message
> > and try to display the thread index, it does display an index but there
> > is no trace of this particular thread, which makes the ensuing
> > discussion difficult to follow..
>
> You can use the "Next by thread" link.
What I did.. but you don't know who posted what.. and when you have to
go through 4-5 useless posts before you get to the one that has useful
content..
But I was just being sarcastic at the mutt folks of all people not being
able to manage their mailing list's archives correctly :-)
> > So, I'm not sure I understand the solution & how it improves on:
> >
> > → :sh while composing in vim
> > → start new instance of mutt
> > → do what you have to do - e.g. copy parts of messages
> > → 'q'+'Ctrl-D' to return to composing
>
> The proposed solution involves the script[1]:
>
> ,----[ external-reply.sh ]
> | #!/bin/sh
> | DRAFT="$1"
> | cp "$DRAFT" "$DRAFT.tmp"
> | (
> | xterm -e "exec mutt -H \"$DRAFT.tmp\""
> | sleep 1
> | rm -f "$DRAFT.tmp"
> | ) &
> |
> | exit 0
> `----
>
> which you set as your editor (set editor="external-reply.sh"). Now
> whenever you compose a message it opens in a new xterm and you can use
> the first mutt to do whatever you want.
Thanks for clarifying..!
I got this to work for me under gnu screen - I only needed to replace
the xterm invocation by:
screen -X screen mutt -H "$DRAFT.tmp"
and mutt+vim is launched in a newly created screen "window". I was then
able to split the screen and cause the original mutt session to inhabit
the new window.
I haven't looked into it, but I'm confident I could cause screen to
split the screen automatically and present you with both instances of
mutt - the original one and the one that's launching the editor.
Thus fairly transparently emulating the missing feature.
> The only trouble with it is that the second mutt prompts for "To:" and
> "Subject:". There's a hint in the thread about using a macro to work
> around it, but I don't have any idea where to start.
In my setup, I am requested to confirm the "To:" with the correct value
already filled in .. so I only need to hit enter.. and then I'm prompted
for "Cc:" .. with nothing filled in.. and since I'm not Cc'ing anybody I
hit enter again. But I am not prompted for the "Subject:" field. So, in
my case, it's just a matter of hitting <enter> twice. There should be a
way to cause mutt to send those two enter's automatically.. but I don't
know how.
Also, I noticed that if I postpone a message, and retrieve it later.. I
am asked for the exact same fields.. so the differing behaviors must
have something to do with our different setups.
Your best bet if you can't figure it out would be to post to the mutt
list (mutt-user, I believe) since there are few mutt experts out there
who would (1) flame you for not reading the famous manual, and (2) not
resist the temptation to demonstrate that _they_ have read it many times
and provide you with a solution.
Thanks again for taking the trouble to explain.
CJ
Reply to: