----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Campbell" <bill@celestial.com>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sco.misc
To: <sco-misc@lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 12:53 AM
Subject: Re: mutt -a redirect


> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>On 27 Mar, 12:17, Jeff Hyman <scol...@cactus.com> wrote:
>>> MUTT shell script question: SCO 5.0.6 mutt v1.5.3i
>>>
>>> :
>>> mutt -s "SUBJECT HEADER" -a file.pdf -c b...@dealer.com j...@customer.com
>>> exit
>>>
>>> Objective: Not having to interact with 'mutt'.
>>> Ability to "attach" a PDF file
>>>
>>> The above example, when executed, goes into an interactive mode.
>>> mutt -s "SUBJECT HEADER" j...@customer.com < file.pdf
>>> This example does not solve the -[a]ttachment PDF issue.
>>>
>>> Any ideas?
>>> - Jeff H
>>
>>Don't use mutt. Use the "mpack" utility to generate concatenatable
>>files, and feed them to /bin/mail. Using a complex and pecular mail
>>client such as mutt for system operations and non-interactice
>>operations is begging for pain.
>
> The ``mpack'' I find with a Google search is a rather nasty piece
> of malware.
>
> Unless your mpack generates proper multipart MIME, the e-mail
> files will be difficult to handle with any modern mail client
> (uuencode is also deprecated).


He means this,
ftp://ftp.andrew.cmu.edu/pub/mpack/
and the sco binary here:
http://www.aljex.com/bkw/sco/#mpack

Whos pupose is just exactly that, to non-interactively assemble files and command line arguments into a mime encoded email. It's somewhat smaller and lighter than mutt since it's not also an interactive curses mail client with all that implies. I use it a lot, however, I think mutt is a fine way to go since it is far more common.
I have to say that lightmail is really excellent too.
http://lightmail.fairlite.com/index.shtml


--
Brian K. White brian@aljex.com http://www.myspace.com/KEYofR
+++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
filePro BBx Linux SCO FreeBSD #callahans Satriani Filk!