[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Nmh-workers] Please proof-read chapter about MH/nmh

2010-04-12 15:39:12
Thanks for your reply. :-)

[2010-04-12 11:20] Jerrad Pierce <belg4mit(_at_)pthbb(_dot_)org>
Section 4.4 Re: filters

`pick` is a mail-aware grep-like filter
I use it in a chain-like way via:
    alias pscan 'scan `pick !:*`' #tcsh

I needed the -list option to make pick print message numbers. Did the
default change for this? Because the man page includes this usage of
pick too, but with nmh-1.3, it does not work without -list.

However, thanks for pointing this out, it's a good example. I think
I'll add this.

Section 4.5 Re: IMAP
You should probably revisit the list discussion and include some of the 
For instance, most of those who spoke up seem to support falling back on the
Unix Way and farming out IMAP support to some other tool, be that a FUSE layer
or something else. Some IMAP features would not be readily available, but the
general mailstore would be, at no cost to us...

I know about this approach and generally support it, but what is the
difference to ftpfs, sshfs, or NFS then? With this approach, IMAP
would just map a remote directory into the local directory tree.

I don't know much about IMAP, but Wikipedia lists ``server-side
searches'' for instance. This would not be possible. Do you understand
my point? If IMAP would just map a directory, then it has nothing to
do with MH. Any other FUSE layer would be equally good.

IMAP and MH do not fit well together, but you can use IMAP in a way,
so that MH sees no difference.

Re: habits

exmh is not pretty, but mh-e has its followers, and is no worse (and indeed
better for not tying up a terminal, just a buffer) than elm/pine/mutt.

Thanks for the information. Unfortunately, for many people you're
already a geek when you use elm/pine/mutt. ;-)


Nmh-workers mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>