jerrad wrote:
> Why?
>
> What difference does it make if MH's mail store format is "non-standard"?
better synergy, i suppose. it might open possibilities for sharing
the mailstore with other mailers. frankly, i'm not sure what might
be gained. but the more time i spend thinking about it, th
Sorry, a little more...
Apparently somebody also thought it was a good idea though,
and one of the top results from Google for nmh maildir is:
http://www.jeenyus.net/linux/mdmh.html
Where someone created some reimplementations of MH comamnds
for use with maildir; the author seems to have drunk
Why?
What difference does it make if MH's mail store format is "non-standard"?
If you ever need to export things there's packf (although some scripting
may be necessary to handle nested folders) to get an mbox.
You wouldn't just be sacrificing "esoteric features" of MH, but also much
of ability t
since i'm sure others have thought about this in the past, i have
to ask, even though i think the answer is "no":
can anyone see a way of integrating the mh notion of per-message
storage with the maildir notion of per-message storage? i've
been trying to think of schemes involving hard- or soft-l
On January 29, 2010 at 23:01, Ken Hornstein wrote:
> If your interest is to only exchange messages with other
> nmh users, then I guess you won't care ... but I would suggest that
> if nmh doesn't evolve, at some point there won't be any other nmh
> users.
I agree.
For years, I have used a separ
On January 30, 2010 at 10:49, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > Not sure how it worked since SASL support is not available
> > when using sendmail as your mts delivery method. I.e. If
> > the SMTP server requires user/pass authentication, sendmail-based
> > deliver will not work.
>
> Sendmail has had
Not sure how it worked since SASL support is not available
when using sendmail as your mts delivery method. I.e. If
the SMTP server requires user/pass authentication, sendmail-based
deliver will not work.
Sendmail has had SASL support for years. The version shipped with your OS
might not have
On January 29, 2010 at 16:22, Joel Reicher wrote:
> Unless I've misunderstood, this is a problem that was discussed and
> solved on comp.mail.mh a couple of years ago.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.mail.mh/browse_thread/thread/47e00851b535
> 80b7
Not sure how it worked since SASL suppo
