On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 10:24:21AM -0400, Brendan Cully wrote:
> On Tuesday, 15 August 2000 at 06:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 03:27:46AM -0500, David Champion wrote:
> > > Turns out you also can use:
> > > push "<limit>! ~h X-IMAP:<return>"
> > > or, I guess,
> > > push "l! ~h X-IMAP:\n"
> > >
> > > I can't guess how much slower that might be, if any, but it's surely
> > > simpler.
> >
> > Definitely! :-) I think this is a very neat approach. I doubt if
> > it's significantly slower and I'm not really fussed on that front, I
> > don't have folders with large numbers of mail messages in them.
>
> Watch out for this one. It may end up rendering all your new messages
> as read (or not recent, anyway). I believe ~h searches require mutt to
> download every message in the mailbox. ~s is much faster because the
> subject is already fetched for the index view...
>
... but it's not needed if you're reading via the server, it's only
needed if you're reading mail direct. Anyway, even if I'm wrong, I'm
reading the mail direct from the mboxes.
However, there is one problem, if the dreaded IMAP message is the
*only* one in the folder then mutt gives an error "No messages matched
criteria." and doesn't remove the message from the index display.
--
Chris Green ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.isbd.co.uk/
