On 06/15/99 Marco Goetze uttered the following other thing:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 1999 at 09:13 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> >On 06/15/1999 (12:26:37), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>On Tue, Jun 15, 1999 at 13:27 +0400, Vitaly A. Repin wrote:
> >>>Is there any version of mutt for win95, win3.1 or ms-dos?
> >>No.
> >There isn't? Brandon Long's mutt page provides patches and
> >documentation for how to get mutt to build as a Win32 console
> >(95/98/NT) application.
> >http://www.fiction.net/blong/programs/mutt/#win32 is where you need to
> >go.
>
> AFAIK, the Windows port of Mutt is no longer being maintained as of
> quite some time ago, and Brandon Long's page at least seems to support
> this assumption, the latest version referenced there being 0.87.4.
The windows port of mutt was never maintained. The port wasn't that
difficult, the main problem being changing mutt's pager (and other
parts) to recognize \r\n as end of line, and making sure mutt opened
files in binary mode (as cygwin would to CRLF->LF translation which
would throw off mutt's own calculation of file sizes).
I compiled it against slang. Getting the termcap right was also minorly
annoying.
I just did it because I was playing with cygwin, but I haven't had a
windows box to play with in almost 1.5 years, so I can't provide a
binary or much assistance. I'm sure the cygwin toolset is much better
these days as well.
Someone was also doing a port for OS/2, which had to fix many of the
same things that I did.
All in all, its kinda weird. Perhaps you could use the imap code to
actually use it, but most of the code for mbox formats, etc would be
unlikely to be needed under windows. In fact, the imap support may
make it unnecessary to "fix" the pager, as the data from the imap server
is the same either way.
Brandon
--
[Brandon Long http://www.fiction.net/blong/]
"Every program has at least one bug and can be shortened by at least one
instruction -- from which, by induction, one can deduce that every
program can be reduced to one instruction which doesn't work."
