Re: PINE Debian Package
On Wed, 22 Apr 1998, Jason Costomiris wrote:
> Weak? Uh, many of us feel that mutt is quite an order of magnitude
> better. I am among those who feel this way. Why is mutt better?
> 1) Native support for Maildir format mailboxen
and that is better?
> 2) *much* more configurable than pine
But is missing some key items.
Put another way. If you have to support a couple of hundred relative unix
clueless, I would rather they use pine than mutt. I will admit that it
has sveraql months since I last took a look at it, I am willing to have
If I had a catchy quip, it would be here.
Debian/GNU Linux ... the maintainable operating system.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com