Re: To mbox or not, that is the question! (fwd)
On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 04:16:48AM -0400, Alan Ezust wrote:
> 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?
I no longer use kmail. I am skeptical that they will pay nicely
together. Kmail seemed to have its own way of managing it folders.
I got the impression that Kmail is more driven by wanting to
be like Outlook than being compatible with other mail clients. I
got tired of the whole desktop schmeer. I use icewm, mutt, vi,
firebird, OO as my desktop.
> 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).
>
My toolchain is:
pop3->getmail->procmail->Maildir->mutt->nullmailer->ISP smarthost SMTP
I can ssh into the box and run mutt.
>
>
--
Mike
Moving forward in pushing back the envelope of the corporate paradigm.
Reply to: