David DeSimone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 29 Sep 1999:
> In maildir folders, mail with the "N" status is placed in the "new"
> subdir. And so are messages that have been newly delivered.
Right, yes, understood.
> So, Mutt
> can't tell the difference between these two types of messages. So when
> it switches away, it notices files in the "new" subdir, and tells you
> that there is new mail.
But it could, in theory, keep track of how many messages were in the
"new" dir when it left that folder, and if that number is the same
currently then there is no "really new" mail. Presumably if there
would be new mail added to the folder, the number of files would
increase. Of course, this is unreliable if some other MUA is used to
read/handle mail in that same folder, it could move a message from the
"new" dir to "cur" and a new message could just arrive, making the
count match. But this scenario is rather improbable. And now that I
think of it, Mutt could just check the modified time for the "new"
folder to see the last change within that dir, couldn't it? Although
that wouldn't tell whether there's new mail arrived, or mail in "new"
moved/deleted.
Anyway I don't know how much work this all would be implementing in
practice, and the behaviour is just a minor irritant. A much bigger
irritant is that in the folder index, if I have sort by "reverse-date",
Mutt uses the actual main directory timestamp for Maildir folders. This
never changes, so the order of Maildirs is always the same, regardless
of whether there is new mail or not. Much more useful would be if Mutt
would check the timestamp of the "new" directory inside the Maildir (and
possibly the "cur" too, using the newer of the two) so that these
folders would sort correctly.
Mikko
--
// Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
Money isn't everything..... There's also roleplaying games.
