On Fri, Jan 19, 2001, Dave Pearson wrote:
> Yes it does.
>
> > to quote the docs:
> > -----------
> > Note: new mail is detected by comparing the last modification time to
> > the last access time. Utilities like biff or frm or any other program
> > which accesses the mailbox might cause Mutt to never detect new mail
> > for that mailbox if they do not properly reset the access time. Backup
> > tools are another common reason for updated access times.
> > -----------
>
> That quote is informing you that if you allow other tools to modify the
> timestamps. It doesn't say that mutt's detection of mailboxes with new mail
> is unreliable.
Hi,
I'd like to follow up this conversation with a concrete question about
this new mail detection that has been bothering me for a bit:
I've never been able to have mutt inform me of new mail in my
mailboxes, which are filtered by procmail after being retreived from
the dept. mailhub by fetchmail (even though they're listed properly
with the mailbox command in my muttrc). I'm mentioning this as I
don't think I'm encountering any of the noted access issues above as I
don't grep my mailbox files or otherwise touch them outside mutt and
the only backup script that the sysadmin tells us about runs at 5am
everyday (and I still can't see new mail at any time of the day). My
only guess might be that I'm running on AFS, which doesn't seem to be
as extensively tested and I've encountered a few other mail
difficulties with AFS.
My mutt is now at 1.0.1i, and I'll try to convince the sysadmin to
upgrade to 1.25. Could this version difference affect my not seeing
new mail marked, or maybe it's still present in the current release?
Am i correct to guess AFS? Any other suggestions are much
appreciated.
Thanks so much,
Daniel
--
Daniel A. Freedman
Laboratory for Atomic and Solid State Physics
Department of Physics
Cornell University
