Thorsten --
...and then Thorsten Haude said...
% Hi,
Hello! I know that this has been answered back and forth a bit, but it
looks to me like things might still be a bit unclear...
%
% I want to run two Mutts in parallel.
Not a problem. I, too, do it frequently; one common reason I do is
to separately tag and handle some messages when I already have a bunch
tagged for some other purpose.
% 1. Is there any problem except writing mailboxes?
mutt handles recognizing a changed mailbox very well; there shouldn't be
any problems.
If you have the proper locking code on your system (dotlock, fnctl,
whatever) then even if you try to sync the mailbox with two or more mutts
at the same time you'll be fine; one of them will get the lock, and the
other will wait.
Note that something as simple as "cat msg >> mailbox" does *not* know
about locking, so it might muck up a mailbox as its being written by
mutt, but you only asked about parallel mutts so that shouldn't affect
you.
% 2. Does '-R' read-only all mailboxes or just the one I name in the
% command line? Is there another way to do it?
You could use the alternative read-only muttrc that you mentioned or just
use the -R flag; you could also hit % when you get into the box to make
it read-only.
%
% tia,
% Thorsten
% --
% They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
% temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
% - Benjamin Franklin
:-D
--
David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles
(play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
PGP signature
