On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 09:02:29AM +0100, Chris Green wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:11:24PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 05:46:53PM +0100, Chris Green wrote: > > > Does mutt still use the (IMHO silly) maildir hierarchy where mail > > > 'folders' are simply represented by another '.' and name in the > > > maildir directory name? > > > > I'm not sure why you think Mutt is doing this... I have my maildir > > folders set up in exactly the way you say you want and they work fine. > > But Mutt, by and large, isn't what created that mailbox structure--it > > was procmail. Presumably it's also true for you that whatever is > > delivering your mail is creating the directory structure, and mutt is > > just consuming it. > > > Yes, true enough, and your reply encourages me to try again. > "Whatever is delivering your mail" in my case is my own Python filter > script that receives mail via ~/.forward so that's easy enough to make > do the right thing (I think!). > > I think I may previously have tried with other delivery agents which > use the maildir++ format. > > Thanks! > Just to report success. It all appears to be working as I want with 'real' directories for my mail hierarchy.
It was basically quite simple to do, mostly using 'find', first to create a copy of my old mbox directory hierarchy and then to run mb2md against each mbox to the required destination in the new hierarchy. Obviously there were a few changes to my muttrc to tell mutt to create maildir rather than mbox and the delivery/filter program run by .forward has to create maildir mails rather than mbox ones (which makes it a lot simpler of course). I use mairix for searches so that was pretty trivial to change over to the new format too. I think my previous encounters with maildir had forced me to use maildir++ because I was using 'ready made' MDAs. Now I have my own MDA written in Python that is no longer an issue. -- Chris Green
