Subject: Re: hmmm

From: "Colin J. Raven" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 15:50:41 -0000

Yup, there's a really easy solution readily available to you called a
signature file (otherwise known as a dotsig or .signature) and it's a bit
more elegant than twenty header lines.
Two methods of accomplishing what (I think) you are looking for:
1. quit pine, and at the command prompt do a:
pookie.guts.com$touch .signature
pookie.guts.com$chmod 755 .signature
pookie.guts.com$pico .signature
(this brings up the default text editor and your screen will be blank,
because it's a new and empty file you've brought up)
at the top, type something like the following:
------------------------------------------------------------<separator line
don't type this in, just a version of what's below it>
Mike Cross
http://www.phatboys.com/
mailto: [email-masked]
"If you can't convince them, confuse them." -Harry S Truman
------------------------------------------------------------<separator line>
Try (please) to limit your dotisg to maybe five lines max if it's feasible
(it is in your case) and follow the format shown above.
OK, next do a ^O (Ctrl O) and you'll see a "File Name to Write .signature?"
hit enter and there will be a couple of brief messages that flash by. Then
hit ^X (Ctrl X) which bales you out of pico.
OK, now you have a dotsig, now how do you incorporate it into each email you
send? simple. Get back into Pine and on the main menu screen hit "S" (Setup)
"C" (Configure" and tab down the selections to signature-file. If it reads
<No Value Set: using .signature> then leave it alone, if it reads
differently, hit "C" (Change value) and type in .signature) then tab down
almost to the end of the first section of configurable variables until you
see signature-at-bottom and check that by hitting enter or hit the "x" key.
Now hit "E" (Exit Configuration) you'll see the message "Commit Changes
("Yes" replaces settings, "No" abandons changes)? and hit enter or "y" for
yes to commit the changes you have made. Now hit "C" for compose, and voila,
there will be a .dotsig which will remain at the bottom of each email you
send until you decide to ever change it or delete it.
I gave you the "real" way to create a dotsig, although Pine will do it for
you if you go to setup/configuration/signature which is a bad way of
learning anything about Unix. Follow this method, and you've learned several
things....how to create a file from scratch, change it's permissions (never
mind too much about that for now but it's there anyway) and open it, edit
it, save the changes, and make it work within your email environment.
Hope this answers your question, and if so, we expect you to post to the
list using your new dotisg!!!!! Don't worry if it's goofy to begin with,
just about everyone has a goofy dotsig in the beginning. You'll change it as
time goes by, everyone does.
Good Luck!
-Colin
--------------------------------------------
Colin J. Raven
Network & Systems Administration.
HDS Lab, Inc.
Costa Mesa CA  |  Harrison NY
[email-masked]
"Communications at the Speed of Life"
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike <[email-masked]>
To: Pine Discussion Forum <[email-masked]>
Date: Friday, January 16, 1998 10:09 PM
Subject: hmmm

>Ok, now its starting to get interesting.  How can I make it show the
>customized headers to the recipient?  This is what I have done:
>
>The first thing that I did was play with the custom headers.  Then I turned
on
>the full headers option (CTRL+R) and there they were.  However, when I went
>back in, I saw that there were also default headers.  I tried changing it
to
>let me adjust the "From" header, and it told me I couldnt do that.  Then I
put
>in the regular headers and the custom ones from below.  Yeah.  Well, once I
>had saved those changes I went again to compose another letter.  However,
only
>the regular headers were there.  This wasnt cool.  What was going on?  So I
>changed the custom ones back to their own respective custom area in the
>settings, and did a full header command again, and filled them in and sent
it.
>Aggh!  This time, it sent fine, and I mailed it to myself.  Aw, this is
just
>great.  It doesnt show the custom headers unless I have the full header
>command on!  Is there anyway to force Pine to show those headers that I
want
>it to see?  Say I want my friends to see my website.  I want a header to
say:
>
>Website:  http://www.foo.com/
>
>It only shows up in full header display.  Aw pooh, I was hoping to sneak
that
>one in.  It's getting interesting, although it's kinda a tease.  Boo.  Can
>anyone help?  Thanks in advance.
>
>______________________________________________________________
> [email-masked] * Mike Cross *  Minister of Propaganda
> "If you can't convince them, confuse them." -Harry S Truman
>  Mundus vult decipi, ergo decepiatur. Frontis nulla fides.
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

---

From: "Robin S. Socha" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 03:56:00 +0100 (CET)

> more elegant than twenty header lines.

No, Colin, it isn't. I'm too tired to check the son-of-rfc-1632 or
something, stuff like urls goes in the header.

> Two methods of accomplishing what (I think) you are looking for: 1. quit
> pine, and at the command prompt do a: pookie.guts.com$touch .signature

pookie.guts.com? Cute. But why on earth would you touch a sigfile and...

> pookie.guts.com$chmod 755 .signature

make it executable??? and then

> pookie.guts.com$pico .signature

use this abomination called pico to edit that file, instead of simply using
the sigfile option available on the M(ain) screen?

> ---------------------------------------------------<separator line

Colin? Back in the days when XEmacs roamed my harddrive, I had this:

;;* This one takes care of fucked-up signatures
(setq gnus-signature-separator
      '("-- *$"		; The standard
	"^-- *$"        ; A common mangling
        "^-------*$"    ; Many people just use a looong
                        ; line of dashes.  Shame!
        "^ *--------*$" ; Double-shame!
        "^________*$"   ; Underscores are also popular
        "^========*$")) ; Pervert!

That's "-- " and nothing else? dash dash blank. Some programs use this
separator to do fancy stuff with signatures. Pine doesn't, btw. Some
programs put sigdashes in automagically. Pine doesn't. Why me? Why my
XEmacs? Why not pine? I want my Gnus back... *sniff*

> "If you can't convince them, confuse them." -Harry S Truman

Unless your hdd is broken, you don't need the email in there - it's in your
from: line. The URL could use standard format, too: <URL:http://foo.bar.com>
to make it clickable. Pine doesn't do that, btw. *sigh*

[snipped really interesting things I didn't read]
> Follow this method, and you've learned several things....

Colin? You have just taught the young man how to do about everything
feasible wrong. But that's ok, because this is not gnu.emacs.gnus, but the
pine discussion forum, and the only reason we're here is because we are nice
chaps that enjoy a good laugh once in a while. Technical problems do not
really belong here...

> just about everyone has a goofy dotsig in the beginning. You'll change it
> as time goes by, everyone does.

Yeah... Some people have really cool stuff to change their signatures:

;;* Use random signatures in message-mode
;;  written by Matt Simmons <[email-masked]>
(require 'random-sig)
(setq random-signature-head (expand-file-name "~/.sigfiles/HEAD"))
(setq random-signature-dir  (expand-file-name "~/.sigfiles"))
(setq message-signature 'random-signature-fun)

I wish things were as easy as that with pine. 

[email-masked]

-- 
.signature: I/O error
*nrglflmpblymenshrrsn*

---

From: Andrew Vardy <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 13:14:51 -0330 (NST)

> to make it clickable. Pine doesn't do that, btw. *sigh*

I don't agree.  Here's why

a.  That standard format looks too codey.  I don't like codey looking
stuff.

b.  It's confusing looking.

c.  More chance that a long URL will not fit on a line.  You're just
making a longer line.  Too many characters.  And also, whoever's e-mail
progy may wrap lines.  How's ya supposed to follow it if it takes TWO
lines?!

d.  Would you expect everyday people to just type in all that, whenever
they mention a URL? I expect not.

Mike, leave it like you have it.

> chaps that enjoy a good laugh once in a while. Technical problems do not

Tech. problems don't belong here.  But if you ask non-tech problems,
you'll find you don't belong here either.  :-)

[...]
> I wish things were as easy as that with pine. 

Yeah.  So don't worry about sig.'s until people make universal EASY
methods to write them, and context sensitive inclusion.    

BTW, I don't like Sig.'s, take away Kbytes of message space.

2nd BTW, didn't someone just post here saying her e-mail program shut
down, now inoperative, based on file space overflow?  

If anyone likes Sig.'s, why not write my postmaster from the hostname, or
her postmaster.  And ask them to increase the general quota.

Ok---- here's my Sig.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If anyone likes Sig.'s, why not write my postmaster from the hostname, or
her postmaster.  And ask them to increase the general quota."

So saith AV, in ano domini 1998, jan. 17.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Robin S. Socha" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 21:41:14 +0100 (MET)

> > Unless your hdd is broken, you don't need the email in there - it's in
> > your from: line. The URL could use standard format, too:
> > <URL:http://foo.bar.com> to make it clickable. Pine doesn't do that,
> > btw. *sigh*

Andrew, it's standard. I don't care what you think looks codey or not, if
you don't stick to standards, you're in great danger.

> b.  It's confusing looking.

Guess you're easily confused.

> making a longer line.  

No, Andrew, I'm using the accepted standard for a URL. Nothing more, nothing
less.

> Too many characters.  

Yes, Andrew. Certainly.

> And also, whoever's e-mail progy may wrap lines.  How's ya supposed to
> follow it if it takes TWO lines?!

Andrew, do you know HTML? If not, learn it.

> they mention a URL? I expect not. 

Andrew, I think you don't understand. But that's ok. We've decided to be
nice and gentle.

> Mike, leave it like you have it.

No, Andrew.

[purpose of this list] 
> you'll find you don't belong here either.  :-)

Tech problems do belong here. One of those problems was my broken hdd.
BUT... Linux is not Windos, so I had a new running system with 60 minutes.
This rocks. 

> methods to write them, and context sensitive inclusion. 

Andrew, it cannot get much easier than with pine, although (HELLO!!!) the
sigdashes should be standard when editing the sigfile.

> BTW, I don't like Sig.'s, take away Kbytes of message space.

Andrew, the miles of stuff you didn't crop in your reply took a lot more.

> down, now inoperative, based on file space overflow?

Oh dear... Mymy... Well, I certainly could tell Gnus not to save signatures
that are PROPERLY (you got me, Andrew?) separated.

> her postmaster.  And ask them to increase the general quota.

Excellent. Andrew, you are totally meschugge.

> Ok---- here's my Sig.

It sucks. Plain and simple. Thanks for your valuable input, Andrew. Next
one, please.

Robin
-- 
Robin S. Socha
CEO German Web Force
Proudly running Linux on 500MB *sigh*

---

From: Andrew Vardy <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 18:25:21 -0330 (NST)

> you don't stick to standards, you're in great danger.

Interesting, but you haven't followed your own standard before.  You
have given URLs, not in the above form.

Second, a message body does not go by any "standard"!  People type in it.
Actual human beings.  You can type any word you want.  It will be included
in the message body.  (You can type German here too, as evidently you
have.  Even though this is an English speaking group.)

> Guess you're easily confused.

Hello!  Hello!  Anybody home?

> No, Andrew, I'm using the accepted standard for a URL. Nothing more, nothing

Standard, and who uses it?  I think you prefer argumentation anyway.
Robin prefers disagreeing to agreeing.  :-)

So you think it's a nice standard to have when 2% of Internet users may
use it?  

> Andrew, do you know HTML? If not, learn it.

Don't need to know HTML for an e-mail program.  HTML is not considered
acceptable in e-mail and on usenet.  HTML here is not *standard* usage.
Nope.  

HTML is for the Web.

> Andrew, I think you don't understand. But that's ok. We've decided to be

We??  Why, does Robin have multiple personalities?

> Andrew, it cannot get much easier than with pine, 

Hello?  Hello??  Robin, you are contradicting yourself.

Amazing how you can contradict yourself in such a short time.  

You are most clearly quoted above.

> Andrew, the miles of stuff you didn't crop in your reply took a lot more.

Whatever "miles" you may be referring to, no one would be able to follow
the thread if everything was cropped.

> that are PROPERLY (you got me, Andrew?) separated.

My my what?  What does Gnus have to do with PINE discussion forum?  What
does your hd have to do with PINE?

My my, did she say she was using Gnus??

Or... Were you planning to send her the installation files for it, and
give her in-depth e-mail help on installing it?

> Excellent. Andrew, you are totally meschugge.

Please talk some French or Latin instead.

Thank you for your cooperation.

---

From: "Robin S. Socha" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 00:12:34 +0100

> On Sat, 17 Jan 1998, Robin S. Socha wrote:

[standard for typing URLs] 
> have given URLs, not in the above form.

Yes, Andrew. Those I put in manually. I'm lazy.

> have.  Even though this is an English speaking group.)

Indeed, Andrew, indeed. However, I cannot quite follow your logic here. Just
because it can be altered by the user, a sigfile has to comply to the same
standards as any other part of an email. Think of linewidth, headers and
quotation marks, Andrew.

[URL standards]
> Standard, and who uses it?  I think you prefer argumentation anyway. Robin
> prefers disagreeing to agreeing.  :-) So you think it's a nice standard to
> have when 2% of Internet users may use it?

I don't care, Andrew. I don't care about what lusers do, and what Microsoft
does, and what you think is correct or not. It's the accepted standard, and
it's not a standard made by some sadistic morons, but experienced admins and
the like. Have you ever wondered if there might be a reason *why* those
standards are set?

[URLs spanning more than one line]
> Nope. HTML is for the Web.

Certainly. But some MUAs are aware of URLs, and therefore, you need to
comply to the accepted internet standard for typing URLs. Otherwise, those
URLs don't work and you might as well not use them at all.

> We??  Why, does Robin have multiple personalities?

No. At least I'm not aware of any. "We" seems to be the other members of
this list. Right, guys?

[random sigs and signatures]
> Hello?  Hello??  Robin, you are contradicting yourself. Amazing how you
> can contradict yourself in such a short time.

No, Andrew. I was talking about how easy Gnus is to heavily customize in
contrast to pine. Then I said that creating a signature with pine is easy.
Can you understand the difference, Andrew?

[bandwidth and diskspace wasted by sigfiles]
> the thread if everything was cropped.

Certainly, Andrew, certainly.

[quota problems by sigfiles]
> My my what?  What does Gnus have to do with PINE discussion forum?  

It has features which pine sorely lacks. Since this is a discussion forum, I
feel entitled to comment on these shortcomings from time to time, Andrew.
Any objections from a technical point of view?
[...]
> My my, did she say she was using Gnus?? Or... Were you planning to send
> her the installation files for it, and give her in-depth e-mail help on
> installing it?

Like I did with your setup? No, much too time-consuming, Andrew.

> > > If anyone likes Sig.'s, why not write my postmaster from the hostname,
> > > or her postmaster.  And ask them to increase the general quota.

What's objectionable about Yiddish, Andrew? And I'm not quite sure if your
knowledge of Latin would suffice here...

> Thank you for your cooperation.

You're most welcome.

Robin

-- 
Receiving file: xemacs-20.3.tar.gz
84%  0 ===================================> 13550239 bytes. ETA: 1:31