Mark wrote:
Just to confirm...we're both talking about using the Message-ID
header as the basename for the saved copy of the original message,
not the message number as used by nmh?
I was thinking the message number. But I like Message-ID,
great idea.
Hmmm... I've never filed a bug report on this, and I don't know if
it's still an issue w. v1.5, but I vaguely remember a problem with
rmm "comma" files, something like:
if a comma file (,123) already exists
and a message (123) is rmm'ed
comma file does not get updated with the content of
the message, it is simply deleted
I've never noticed that and I can't replicate it. And the
code uses rename() everywhere to create the backup file so
it shouldn't happen in normal operation. Everywhere except
one place, but that's in msh.
While not serious, this was sometimes an unpleasant
surprise. If the user expects that the ,123 file contains
the original version of message 123, this would be a
bigger issue.
The user shouldn't expect that anyway due to folder -pack,
at least.
David
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers