>My *intent* when adding the hook code was to allow external, non-nmh programs >to access the message store keeping track of changes. I added this code for >a specific purpose, and never thought about anyone executing nmh commands >inside of hook code. So I support Ken's conclusion that doing so is madness.
I understand, and yet it's such a powerful way to extend the features of nmh without requiring core changes e.g; the supplemental MIME storage I'm using. Maddening as the sequence clash is, there's a workaround (though who knows when it might break, since it's not clear why I should work... my guess is it's akin to funky scoping like local $foo = $foo in perl). The thing that makes the least sense to me is that mark gives different results than cat, despite being run from the same environment/situation. P.S. It would still be useful to have environment variables exposed, and del-hook ought to let the child know if -unlink was used e.g; by setting the CMD to rmm-unlink instead of rmm _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
