Re: What am I missing without mutt?
On Feb 5, 2008 9:11 PM, Ron Johnson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 02/05/08 22:27, s. keeling wrote:
> > I come from the dark ages. For me, it's important that the tools I
> > use write files that anything can deal with, not just the app which
> > created them. Mutt handles any standard form of mail box format,
> > including on_some_other_server(don't much care how), aka. imap.
> > The guis, in my experience, save in their own format (If you let them?
> That's just not true.
> Well, ok, it's *partially* true: Outlook stores mail in a
> proprietary indexed format.
> But Netscape and it's descendants all use mbox as the native format,
> as does Evolution & KMail. Sylpheed uses mh, which is also a
> standardized text format.
> The only non-standard bit about these mailers is the directory where
> they decide to store these mbox files.
But there are four types of mbox, and Thunderbird and SeaMonkey use
a variant of one of those (although TB3 will finally support maildir).