* Adam Wellings on Tuesday, July 21, 2009 at 11:17:09 +0100
> I have a folder hierarchy of maildirs, though only the nodes (or leaves) are
> actually maildirs, eg:
>
> fol2
>| -Fol2
>|| -maildira
>|| -maildirb
>| -Fol3
>|| -Fol4
>||| -maildirc
>||| -maildird
>|| -maildire
>| -Fol5
>|| -etc..
>
> This mailboxes command works for me:
>
> mailboxes `find /path/to/mail -type d -name cur printf '%h '`
Sure, but (my find doesn't have printf):
~$ time find ~/Mail -type d -name cur -execdir pwd \; > /dev/null
real 0m54.973s
user 0m0.447s
sys 0m54.159s
~$ time find ~/Mail -type -d \( \( -name cur -o -name new -o -name tmp \)
-prune -o -print \) > /dev/null
find: -type: -d: unknown type
real 0m0.401s
user 0m0.001s
sys 0m0.011s
> It produces a set of absolute paths, rather than a relative ones (%h is the
> path for the parent).
No problem if you have $folder set.
> It also relies on no, non-maildir folder having a
> sub-directory of "cur", but that's a minor point. I think I have a
> different/better method on my home machine, but as I'm at work (this is a
> Cygwin installation), I can't look that up at the moment.
Personally I also want to *exclude* certain nodes/leaves and
mailboxes, which is why I always end up with simple printf:
mailboxes "!"
mailboxes `printf ' %s' ~/Mail/[a-z-]* ~/Mail/[^ANa-z-]*/[^_]*`
That's because my setup doesn't change (I know I don't have
hierarchies deeper than 2) and I've imposed some conventions,
like starting the nodes' names with a capital letter.
The corresponding, slightly more flexible find command (for my
setup):
mailboxes `find -E ~/Mail -type d \( \( -name cur -o -name new -o -name tmp \) \
-prune -o ! -regex '.*/([A-Z_][a-z]*|(Archive|News)/.*)' -print \) \
| tr '\n' ' '`
c
--
Was heißt hier Dogma, ich bin Underdogma!
[ What the hell do you mean dogma, I am underdogma. ]
_F R E E_ _V I D E O S_ http://www.blacktrash.org/underdogma/
http://www.blacktrash.org/underdogma/index-en.html
