On Mon, Apr 20, 1998 at 04:15:53PM -0700, George Bonser wrote: : Mutt is, at best, a very weak replacement for Pine. As for text email : clients, Pine has no equal and is "free enough" for most uses. If Debian : is going to start producing a crappy distribution just because it is free, : I will pay for one that is not.
Weak? Uh, many of us feel that mutt is quite an order of magnitude better. I am among those who feel this way. Why is mutt better? 1) Native support for Maildir format mailboxen 2) *much* more configurable than pine 3) Doesn't have the nasty habit of wanting to post to a newsgroup when someone replies (not follows) to your article 4) Doesn't try to pass itself off as a second rate newsreader 5) Support for color 6) Support for threaded discussions (great for mailing lists!) 7) It's less filling: /home/jcostom$ ls -l /usr/local/bin/pine -rwxr-xr-x 1 root users 1193128 Jan 17 12:47 /usr/local/bin/pine /home/jcostom$ ls -l /usr/local/bin/mutt -rwxr-sr-x 1 root mail 320948 Mar 15 22:44 /usr/local/bin/mutt -- Jason Costomiris <>< | Linux... [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "Find out what you've been missing http://www.jasons.org/~jcostom/ | while you've been rebooting Windows NT." #include <disclaimer.h> | --Infoworld -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
