Re: To mbox or not, that is the question! (fwd)
On April 26, 2004 11:26 pm, Mike M wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 10:52:24PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> 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.
Does this mean you found a way of using mutt and kmail on the same maildir
folder, with subfolders and sub-sub folders? That would be very nice - the
ability to use a text-client when remote, and kmail when local. I'm still
trying to figure out a good way of reading my maildir folders remotely
without running over x-windows and without setting up my own IMAP server (I
understand Courier-IMAP also recognizes the same file format as Kmail, so you
can in theory set that up, and then remotely access your maildir files using
any IMAP client).
Reply to: