On 2007-05-27 08:26:53 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 26May2007 18:37, Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | On 2007-05-26 21:56:35 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > | > Of course, such a system isn't a UNIX system... > | > | Is there any reason why Mutt should not run on non-UNIX systems? > > I can think of numerous things that might fail: maildir file names,
There are other mailbox formats and they may be sufficient. > curses support and ttys, etc. curses has been ported on other systems (for instance, the ncurses library has been ported to OS/2 Warp). > The point here is that once you start trying to support nonUNIX, > the number of things that suddenly must become tunable becomes very > very large. I'm not sure about that. Anyway, the solution concerning the PATH separator exists and is well-known. So, why not use it? -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
