Re: To mbox or not, that is the question! (fwd)
On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 10:52:24PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 11:37:17PM +0200, Richard Lyons wrote:
>
> > I'm puzzled. I have tried creating sub-"folders" in kmail, both as mbox
> > and as maildir. I also tried manually creating subdirectories. The
> > results I seemed to get were:
> > - Kmail can't see the manually produced subdirecctories.
> > - Mutt can see them but only when no mail in either format is
> > present in the directory.
> >
> > I guess I did something wrong.
>
> No probably not - although I haven't experimented with this myself prior
> to posting (too tired); as I remember you can still access subdir'd
> maildirs. After all, your Mail/foo are $HOME/Mail/foo, so
> $HOME/Mail/blah/foo isn't any different,
>
> provided blah isn't a Maildir itself, at least.
>
> But even then, as I remember, c ~/Mail/blah/foo <enter> worked for me.
>
> You're perhaps correct in noticing that mutt won't offer up subdirs in
> this fashion through its menus, or with = shortcuts.
I went from kmail to mutt and noticed the support for folder hierarchy
in kmail is "special" and has hidden files associated with it. I was
using mbox in kmail and I am now using Maildir in mutt.
I created the illusion of folder hierarchy in mutt/Maildir by
manipulating the subdir names from ~/Maildir:
~/Maildir
~/Maildir/folder1
~/Maildir/folder1.sub1
~/Maildir/folder1.sub2
~/Maildir/folder2
~/Maildir/folder2.sub1
~/Maildir/folder2.sub2
~/Maildir/folder2.sub3.sub1
~/Maildir/folder2.sub3.sub2
This illusion gives me the same frame of reference I had with kmail
and the mutt navigational aids work as advertised.
Before I could use mutt to read the mbox folder system, I had to
manually convert the folder names to non-hidden names. Once I had done
that I found that some of my mbox files had grown unchecked for quite
a while.
--
Mike
Moving forward in pushing back the envelope of the corporate paradigm.
Reply to: