* On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 04:22:03AM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > Users like history majors and non-cs minors never edit > their PATH because they no freakin' clue about this.
* Thomas E. Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-04 15:52]: > that's too broad a generalization. Last week I was having a > nice chat with a fellow whose field of expertise is economics. > He's also a well-known contributor to XEmacs... and i met a composer who programs in assembler and i met a surgeon who gave courses on unix. but these people *are* exceptions! however, there are many people who open Word to send an email. and i would never suggest that they should be using mutt. after all i dont want the RSPCA chasing me.. ever done support for a newbie? i bet some of you know how it is: "adjust the $MANPATH in your $HOME/.shellrc so you'll get the corresponding manual for you mutt binary which should be in your $PATH (probably in ~/bin - and don't put '.' in there) - then you can read "man muttrc" to set up a variable which in effect does <whatever> - but take care this does interfere with any hooks; so check on the command line whether foo is set, and *don't* use "push" to do those automatic things because that's done by the rules in the procmailrc..." *some* of them might understand the necessity of independent mail *user* agent and mail *delivery* agent. but only some. but it takes some special people to fiddle with commands, the command line, and those hooks. but only very very weird people will ever adjust the MANPATH to the current binary. then again... "some" people may need this. Sven
