Ken wrote:
Okay, here's my thinking, for what it's worth:
- "send" in my mind is mostly a front-end to "post" (or whatever you
have your postproc set to). You need to give it a already-formed
draft.
- mhmail is more of a replacement for "mailx"; it does the draft
composition for you.
So I'm thinking ... well, I think putting a lot of mhmail
into send is the wrong way to go. Different tools and
all. We still have people using mhmail, so my vote would
be to simply fix up mhmail.
mhmail has traditionally been a front end to post, too.
But it's now inadequate and it's a maintenance headache.
I think that replacing it with a script that relies
on send or post could solve both problems.
Let me take a deeper look tonight and see what I come up
with.
Paul wrote:
i'll bet a patch to the man page would be welcomed! :-)
Well put :-) So would contributions to the nmh test suite.
That's a great way to learn more about nmh.
Norm wrote:
mhmail has some features, that are relevant to writing quick
and dirty scripts and that send does not have: the -body,
-subject and -from switches, specifying recipients on the
command line, and taking the draft from the stdin.
That's mhmail in a nutshell. Sounds like a job for a shell
script, which could pass along other switches to send/post.
David
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers