Locking strategies and MAILPATH
It seems that to force the dotlock locking strategy, one needs to use the --with-homespool option. But then, mutt -v says: MAILPATH=mailbox Here, mailbox doesn't correspond to anything. So, is it a problem? Note that my only spool mailbox is an IMAP mailbox. But I need a locking strategy for the postpone and archive mailboxes (under NFS). As fcntl is not reliable here, I think I'll disable it and use dotlocking only. -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ - 100% validated (X)HTML - Acorn Risc PC, Yellow Pig 17, Championnat International des Jeux Mathématiques et Logiques, TETRHEX, etc. Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
Re: search-next annoyance [1.5.1]
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 22:00:21 +0200 From: Sven Guckes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mutt-users [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: search-next annoyance [1.5.1] * Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-07-15 19:57]: i'm getting pretty annoyed by the behavior of search-next; this is how i use mutt pretty often, and it doesn't exactly help to make it easier: starting in index: search~b patternenter display-message searchpatternenter exit search-next display-message search-next hmm... at this moment, instead of just jumping to the next match, mutt prompts me for the pattern. huh? that doesn't happen with my mutt 1.4. it has behaved this way all the way back to 1.2.5i *IIRC*. i had a look at the source, and it looks like the search pattern is being invalidated when you go pager - index, and is compiled again. is there a knob i've overlooked? i'm running 1.5.1i, oh - mutt 1.5.1 maybe that one's different? how come you complain about a *developer* version on the users* list then? well, it wasn't meant to be a complaint in any way. and as i said above: this is not anything new AFAICT. you should try discussing this with the developers on mutt-dev... ;-) ok. -- FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE 2:53AM up 5 days, 13:12, 5 users, load averages: 0.05, 0.03, 0.00
Re: search-next annoyance [1.5.1]
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 22:13:41 +0200 From: Michael Tatge [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mutt-users [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: search-next annoyance [1.5.1] Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered: * Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-07-15 19:57]: starting in index: search~b patternenter display-message searchpatternenter exit search-next display-message search-next hmm... at this moment, instead of just jumping to the next match, mutt prompts me for the pattern. huh? that doesn't happen with my mutt 1.4. I see exactly the same behavior as Roman with mutt 1.4 Seven. Hm, are you running any patches Roman? just patch-1.5.1.cd.edit_threads.9.2 -- FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE 2:57AM up 5 days, 13:16, 5 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00
Re: search-next annoyance
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 00:12:38 +0200 From: Cedric Duval [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mutt-users [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: search-next annoyance Roman Neuhauser wrote: display-message search-next at this moment, instead of just jumping to the next match, mutt prompts me for the pattern. But you are presented the previous value at the prompt, don't you? yes. it's obviously trying to be helpful, but in fact does just the opposite. i just want it to do what i told it, which is search for the next match, not create a new search. macro pager n search-next\n ISTR there was a reason why i didn't just do this in the first place, but i can't remember what it was right now. will try. thanks! -- FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE 2:57AM up 5 days, 13:16, 5 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Re: search-next annoyance
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 02:59:21 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mutt-users [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: search-next annoyance it's obviously trying to be helpful, but in fact does just the opposite. i just want it to do what i told it, which is search for the next match, not create a new search. macro pager n search-next\n ISTR there was a reason why i didn't just do this in the first place, but i can't remember what it was right now. will try. hm, yes, here's the reason: the macro as suggested scrolls down one line with my current mappings, so the matched lines end up outside the pager. if i add previous-line at the end, it'll cause the matched line to be the second displayed line instead of the first, subsequent calls are ok (where the previous-line does what it's there for. really, it's just a nitpick, but this is pretty distracting. i guess i'll just mail mutt-dev@ -- FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE 3:27AM up 5 days, 13:46, 5 users, load averages: 0.06, 0.02, 0.00
