On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 00:01:18 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> Oops, if I'd seen this message before I sent my last post, I probably
> wouldn't have bothered to post it.
>
> That said, I will take issue with the notion that mbox is a terrible
> format: It isn't. It does, however, have usage patte
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 23:25:18 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 08:37:50AM +0200, Sebastian Stein wrote:
...
> > When I open a folder, I can mark a mail as new. How does mutt keep track of
> > this flag? Is this stored inside mbox file?
>
> Yes. It's stored in a message head
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 08:37:50AM +0200, Sebastian Stein wrote:
> Kevin J. McCarthy [200716 18:18]:
> > If the access time is earlier than the modification time, it notifies for
> > new mail.
>
> Wow, what a bad algorithm. I mean, this was probably perfect 20 years ago,
> but in times of desktop
Oops, if I'd seen this message before I sent my last post, I probably
wouldn't have bothered to post it.
That said, I will take issue with the notion that mbox is a terrible
format: It isn't. It does, however, have usage patterns for which
it is not well suited... just like maildir does. If you
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 08:37:50 +0200, Sebastian Stein wrote:
> Kevin J. McCarthy [200716 18:18]:
> > If the access time is earlier than the modification time, it notifies for
> > new mail.
>
> Wow, what a bad algorithm.
It is a super cheap test with zero storage overhead.
> I mean, this was p
Kevin J. McCarthy [200716 18:18]:
> If the access time is earlier than the modification time, it notifies for
> new mail.
Wow, what a bad algorithm. I mean, this was probably perfect 20 years ago,
but in times of desktop search engines, cloud backup services, etc.
something more advanced is neede
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 09:03:59AM +0200, Sebastian Stein wrote:
Kevin J. McCarthy [200715 08:28]:
Have you checked the access time vs modification time of those
mailboxes? Capture them before and after procmail, and then
launching Mutt. See if this gives any clues.
Can you describe the al
Kevin J. McCarthy [200715 08:28]:
> Have you checked the access time vs modification time of those mailboxes?
> Capture them before and after procmail, and then launching Mutt. See if
> this gives any clues.
Can you describe the algorithm how to determine if a mbox file has new
mails? Is this on
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:07:10PM +0200, Sebastian Stein wrote:
set folder="$HOME/Mail"
mailboxes `cd $HOME/Mail; echo P-*|sed -e 's/P-/+&/g'`
mailboxes `cd $HOME/Mail; echo L-*|sed -e 's/L-/+&/g'`
Since you are prefixing your mailboxes with '+' (as you should!), this
precludes the problem be
Kevin J. McCarthy [200714 21:46]:
> Mike's reported bug was triggered by relative path mailboxes. Instead of:
> set folder = "~/Mail"
> mailboxes =a =b =c
> he had:
> set folder = "~/Mail"
> mailboxes a b c
> where a, b, and c were then resolved relative to the mutt starting
> directory,
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 08:26:07AM +0200, Sebastian Stein wrote:
Kevin J. McCarthy [200708 08:59]:
> Perhaps some combination of settings is causing this. Would you mind
> forwarding your configuration to me, so I can try to reproduce with
> that?
Thanks to Mike's help paring down his configu
Kevin J. McCarthy [200708 08:59]:
> > Perhaps some combination of settings is causing this. Would you mind
> > forwarding your configuration to me, so I can try to reproduce with
> > that?
>
> Thanks to Mike's help paring down his configuration to a minimal reproduce,
> I was able to find the pr
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 12:18:40PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 08:34:54PM +0200, mi...@posteo.nl wrote:
* On 07.07. Kevin J. McCarthy muttered:
Do you have $mail_check_stats set?
No.
Perhaps some combination of settings is causing this. Would you mind
forwardin
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 08:34:54PM +0200, mi...@posteo.nl wrote:
* On 07.07. Kevin J. McCarthy muttered:
Do you have $mail_check_stats set?
No.
Perhaps some combination of settings is causing this. Would you mind
forwarding your configuration to me, so I can try to reproduce with
that?
* On 07.07. Kevin J. McCarthy muttered:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:39:49PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> >Also, I wonder if you would mind trying a vanilla mutt 1.14.5 release.
Here vanilla mutt 1.14.5 also looses the information of the
new-mail-folder like stated for Gentoo-mutt 1.13.5 or
On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:39:49PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
Also, I wonder if you would mind trying a vanilla mutt 1.14.5 release.
A quick test on my side wasn't able to duplicate this, so it would be
nice to make sure it isn't a Gentoo patch causing the problem.
After taking a closer
On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:12:38PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 04:49:37AM +0200, mi...@posteo.nl wrote:
My issue seems to be similar to this:
http://lists.mutt.org/pipermail/mutt-users/Week-of-Mon-20200106/001471.html
Mike, would you mind opening a ticket on gitlab
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 04:49:37AM +0200, mi...@posteo.nl wrote:
My issue seems to be similar to this:
http://lists.mutt.org/pipermail/mutt-users/Week-of-Mon-20200106/001471.html
Mike, would you mind opening a ticket on gitlab with all these details?
I'll take a closer look and see what I can
Hi,
My issue seems to be similar to this:
http://lists.mutt.org/pipermail/mutt-users/Week-of-Mon-20200106/001471.html
I'm running procmail and mbox folders on Gentoo. mutt-1.10.1 works fine.
When using mutt 1.13.5 or 1.14.4-r1 opening an additional session makes the
first session forget about fo
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 03:58:30PM +0100, Sebastian Stein wrote:
I've been using 1.13.2 compiled from official source since a few days
and haven't seen the problem again. So I would assume it is related to
the official Kubuntu/Ubuntu package. This makes sense, because I think
the problem only s
Sebastian Stein [200106 20:57]:
> > If possible it would helpful to test against a vanilla 1.10.1 (or newer)
> > tarball, to discount external patch bugs.
>
> Ok, I will try that and report back.
I've been using 1.13.2 compiled from official source since a few days and
haven't seen the problem a
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 08:07:04AM +0100, Sebastian Stein wrote:
Felix Finch [200107 08:03]:
Might I suggest you actually count how many files in those new
Maildir/new dirs, just to make sure they actually are in the new dirs
and haven't moved to cur or something?
I have done that. When the
Felix Finch [200107 08:03]:
> On 20200106, Sebastian Stein wrote:
> > Kevin J. McCarthy [200106 20:25]:
> > > How are you observing the "folders with new mail" count?
>
> Might I suggest you actually count how many files in those new Maildir/new
> dirs, just to make sure they actually are in th
On 20200106, Sebastian Stein wrote:
Kevin J. McCarthy [200106 20:25]:
How are you observing the "folders with new mail" count?
Might I suggest you actually count how many files in those new Maildir/new
dirs, just to make sure they actually are in the new dirs and haven't moved to
cur or som
Kevin J. McCarthy [200106 20:25]:
> This would be the first report I've heard of this. What mailbox format is
> procmail delivering to?
I'm using maildir format, so based on some patterns I move mails to
different files below ~/Mail.
My procmailrc:
PMDIR=$HOME/.procmail
LOGFILE=$PMDIR/maillog
On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 04:03:35PM +0100, Sebastian Stein wrote:
In the past weeks (probably after upgrading to Kubuntu 19.10) I noticed
that mutt forgets about folders containing new mails as soon as I
change one folder.
This would be the first report I've heard of this. What mailbox format
Hi,
I'm using the typical
POP3 -> fetchmail -> procmail -> mutt
chain on Kubuntu 19.10 with mutt 1.10.1.
In the past weeks (probably after upgrading to Kubuntu 19.10) I noticed that
mutt forgets about folders containing new mails as soon as I change one
folder.
For example, while mutt is runn
27 matches
Mail list logo
