On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 02:08:42PM +0200, Johann Spies wrote: > On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 12:45:13PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > I tested Wanderlust for Emacs, but I don't like the tons of short-cuts. What do you mean by "short-cuts"? If you mean keyboard navigation, that is what Mutt is all about. One keypress does one thing, while another does something different. Because there is no GUI, it's 100% entirely driven by the keyboard. So, the term "short-cuts" doesn't really apply here, as it's the _only_ way to get around. In a GUI, I would imagine there are keyboard "short-cuts" to mimic behavior that a mouse would do. > > Hm? Has Mutt a search option? The German Eiki says it one an award, but > > KMail won an award too. > > Mutt has several search options and many shortcuts :) > > I am using a maildir setup and with the maildir-utils I can use F8 to > search all my mail and F9 to browse the result. I haven't setup Mutt to read local mail, personally, so I haven't really researched the search options and availability. I use it behind IMAP, and rely on my IMAP provider for searching, filtering and labeling mail. I just want my MUA to be a dummy-terminal, so-to-speak, to my mail. > I have not come across another mail client that can handle large volumes > of emails as efficiently as mutt (combined with .procmail, maildir and > maildir-utils). If you are not used to text-based mail clients it might > take some time to get used to, but the learning is worth while. Agreed. I have surpassed 80,000 messages with my email provider, and still going strong. Mutt is the only MUA that I have used that I can rip through that amount of mail with little effort. And given all of its powerd and extensibilities, I have a hard time using other clients. Plus, it's 100% standards compliant, which not only is important for me using a web browser, but also important for my mail. -- . o . o . o . . o o . . . o . . . o . o o o . o . o o . . o o o o . o . . o o o o . o o o
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature