I'm sorry, but I don't think implementing this would be a bad idea. I
have to agree that Pine's capabilities to make use of a remote MTA
let new users (newbies...) choose this MUA and not Mutt, which is very
complex, don't have a way to configure all the stuff using menus, etc.
Now you need to choose if you want Mutt being used by people that
don't want to have an MTA installed or configured (very hard for some
of us), or let it to the experienced users only. Ocasionally you see
messages with:
1- I can send mail with Pine but it doesn't work with Mutt
2- How to use a remote host to send my messages?
I have seen a GUI MUA that let you choose if you want to use the
sendmail binary directly or a host, but it was in an alpha stage and
dont't seem to be maintained anymore.
Pine isn't the answer, but there are some good options not present in
Mutt. BTW, you would need how many lines of code to implement such
feature?
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 11:51:55PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> Raju K V [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > Suppose my machine does not have smtp capabilities? ie it does not have
> > sendmail or any other MTA, can I use another machine as smtp host? I am
> > looking for something equivalent to pine's smtp-server option.
>
> When you have pine doing this, your machine /does/ have SMTP capabilities
> and an MTA installed - Pine. Pine speaks SMTP to the remote host you
> specify to get the message there.
>
> Mutt doesn't believe in wasting developers' time and bloating the code base
> this way. There are plenty of real MTAs out there, get one of them.
--
Frederic L. W. Meunier | fredlwm@{olympiquedemarseille.org,urbi.com.br}
IRC: _19751127!date | ICQ: 49149663 | Tel: +55-21-620-7173 (Brasil)
AppWatch staff - http://appwatch.com/ - {fredlwm,staff}@appwatch.com
+-Open Source with quality-+
