Re: Seemingly redundant and/or confusing default mappings

"Mathias M." <[email protected]> Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:38:09 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.mail.mutt.user
Message-ID	<Z7cwQfQJ3zw4mvr6@apollonios>

Hi Joshua,

The cool thing is, you can just define them how you want to.

Here are my bindings so that pager and index behave vim like:

bind generic,index,browser g noop
bind generic,index,browser k previous-entry
bind generic,index,browser j next-entry
bind generic,index,browser gg first-entry
bind generic,index,browser G last-entry
bind pager gg top
bind pager j next-line
bind index J next-thread
bind index K previous-thread
bind pager k previous-line
bind pager G bottom

Regards,
Mathias
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 08:52:02PM +1100, Joshua Rose wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> I've been using Mutt so far for 8 months.  My favourite thing is its
> customizability.  I do, however have an inquiry -- "Why do navigation keys for
> the index differ from those of the pager?"
>
> For instance, to navigate to the top of the *index*, I'd press =, but to
> navigate to the top of the *pager* I'd have to press ^.
>
> If I wanted to navigate to the bottom of the *index*, I'd press *, but to
> navigate to the bottom of the *pager*, I'd have to press <End>. I'd also like
> to point out that when in the pager, the * key is unbound so (as far as I
> understand) there would be no key conflict in making the keys the same.
>
> TYIA.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Joshua Rose

--
For every problem there is one solution which is simple, neat, and wrong.
		-- H. L. Mencken

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)