On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 11:13:41PM +0500, Dimitry Naldayev wrote: > Bruce Dubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > > > I don't regularly use Mutt either. Unfortunately, this > > > also applies to Tin, thus invalidating my proposal to > > > add it. > > > > I think your observation is correct. Right now, we have > > mutt, pine, and slrn. Perhaps we should drop these > > packages and just mention them in the section "Other Mail > > and News Programs." > > > > Other opinions? > > > > RATIONALE: It is wery well for small/clean installation > without X subsustem... also it is well suited for remoute > using over ssh chanel. > > I am using mutt only from time to time... > ---end quoted text---
I have been using mutt as the regular MUA for many years now. When combined with external editors and filters, it is quite an awesome thing, capable of doing ssh, pgp, scripting ... and you just name it. In any case the tinkering of muttrc is well beyond the scope of BLFS. On the whole, I would not consider any of the MUAs to be of significant importance within BLFS. The compilation for both mutt and pine invariably boils down to how you tweek the dot configure script. There are just no 'gotchas' in the compilation process. I compiled mine without even referencing the BLFS advocacies. These are really not that crucial to BLFS. The proposal for shift to "Other mail and news" section is logical. Bish -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
