On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 16:54:28 +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: > you will have to write a *lot* to clear this up for every option...
Very few default values depend on the compile-time option. > * Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-01 13:45]: > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 07:41:22 -0500, Patrick wrote: > > > That IS THE INFORMATION presented in the INSTALL > > > file within the tarball/rpm issue for each > > > version of mutt and most other program issues. > > > > The user doesn't necessarily have the tarball or rpm. > > Moreover, the INSTALL file doesn't say anything about > > the options used for the installed Mutt binary. > > is this really from you, too, Vincent? > i double-checked on this after i read it. > > just as the INSTALL file cannot give > info about the installed mutt binary - > the manual cannot do this, either. I agree. But I recall that *you* wanted the manual to refer to compile-time options of the installed Mutt binary. I didn't. You have to be consistent. If the manual refers to compile-time options to know if the default value given by the manual is correct, the user must have a way to know what options have been used. > PS: send-hook ~l 'set signature=""' > > Sven [who avoids signatures on mailinglists - > and only adds them when they contain further info] Users can use procmail to remove them. :) But later, I may adapt my signature to the Mutt mailing-lists with something like: send-hook ~Cmutt.*@mutt.org 'set signature="~/.sig-mutt" -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> - 100% validated (X)HTML - Acorn Risc PC, Yellow Pig 17, Championnat International des Jeux Mathématiques et Logiques, TETRHEX, etc. Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
