Dan -- ...and then Dan Boger said... % % On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 11:19:14AM -0700, Steve Talley wrote: % > Quick description: ... % > separate invocation of the command. The stdout of the command will be % > appended to the current folder as a new message, and the original % > message will be marked for deletion. % % just curious - wouldn't this break the compression patch? Sounds like a % useful idea, but I can't even try it if it does :/
Don't see why it would; can you clarify your hesitation? If the working folder is modified, say by a save or an edit-message or any such stuff, then mutt will utilize the close-hook command to bundle the temp folder into the place of the compressed folder (whereas if no changes are saved then the temp folder can be thrown away without changing the original folder). Or am I missing something? % % -- % Dan Boger % [EMAIL PROTECTED] HTH & HAND :-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!
msg26173/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
