Re: installing pine
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, ktb wrote:
> You might want to try mutt. I like it a lot better. It
> took some configuring but it isn't as clunky as pine.
I have recently been trying mutt and, quite honestly, I have find mutt a
lot clunkier than Pine.
One example: when you call up Pine for the first time in any home
directory, Pine creates a default .pinerc and it is extremely easy to
customize Pine from the Pine master menu.
In contrast, with mutt, no .muttrc is created automatically on first use
and evidently there exists no easy to use configuration program (at least I
have been unable to find one) as there is in Pine. It took me an hour of
wading through documentation to figure out how to just get my 'From:'
header to display my e-mail address. Apparently, I must do the same for
each item of customization I want in mutt.
Another example: control and navigation keys are clearly displayed at the
bottom of each Pine screen. For the equivalent functionality in mutt, I
must press '?' and wade through a gadzillion keys displayed over multiple
screens.
I would gladly convert to mutt from Pine just to get a more pure open
source license. But, in my opinion, the clunkiness of mutt makes such a
conversion quite formidable when I must still read my e-mail each day.
So I am very surprised to hear you say that you think Pine is clunkier than
mutt. I would welcome learning in what ways.
Dwight
Reply to: