Ken Hornstein <kenh(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com> writes:
Lack of From munging?
That was indeed the reason that I chose it. The thing about
archives is that they are supposed to hang around for a long
time. I’ve been using some form of mh since the 1980s, and the
script that archives my mailboxes hasn’t changed much since
then.
I suppose that's a reason, but it just seems like mbox has been the
standard for approximately forever and MMDF is one of those weird relics
like UUCP that I only hear about once in a million years.
Which is a shame. One of the first things I learnt was that
using in-band data as a separator is a bad idea, so mmdf was
obviously a more sensible format than mbox. The last time I saw
a “>From” that should have been a “From” in a mail body was much
more recent than it should have been.
I think at this point MH/nmh is probably the only tool left that can
deal with such things.
Well, it’s good that it still does. As I said, archives.
--
Jón Fairbairn
Jon(_dot_)Fairbairn(_at_)cl(_dot_)cam(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk
http://www.chaos.org.uk/~jf/Stuff-I-dont-want.html (updated 2014-04-05)
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers