david wrote: > Paul wrote: > > > as far as i can tell, the -noprint switch to the folder command > > is inoperative, since a line of code just below the argument parsing > > loop sets the default value of printsw to be non-zero. > > Yeah, looks like it's always (at least since 1989/06/26) been that way. > I use -f(ast), but it looks like -noprint would be a bit more efficient.
but that still prints the folder name, doesn't it? i think -noprint might be totally silent. (of course, since it doesn't work, i don't actually know. :-) paul > > i also see that -noprint isn't documented. perhaps not a coincidence? > > > > i can fix it, if it seems that i'm reading this right. > > Sure. > > David > > -- > Nmh-workers > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers > =---------------------- paul fox, [email protected] (arlington, ma, where it's 1.9 degrees) -- Nmh-workers https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
