On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:10:54PM +0100, Chris G wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 08:05:31PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> >
> > [1]
> > If mutt knows not to flag the transferred email as new, then it also
> > knows enough not chuck up the erroneous "New mail" message. The logic
> > used for
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 08:05:31PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:
>
> [1]
> If mutt knows not to flag the transferred email as new, then it also
> knows enough not chuck up the erroneous "New mail" message. The logic
> used for the message flags is different from that used for confusing
> the use
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 02:57:05PM +0100, Chris G wrote:
> If one writes a message to an mbox file then the size changes and (if atime is
> enabled) the modification time will be after the access time. So mutt
> *has* to say there's new mail in the mailbox.
Ah, then it is possibly only the immedia
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 09:00:13AM -0800, rog...@sdf.org wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 03:05:14PM +0200, Christian Ebert wrote:
> >I can't reproduce this, neither with $check_mbox_size set or
> >unser. Unless, of course, I copy a message that is flagged as
> >New.
>
> I've seen this sporadicall
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 04:03:54PM -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 03:38:14PM -0500, Will Fiveash wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 09:02:13AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > > * Chris G [06-24-10 08:10]:
> > > > I'm getting the feeling that, maybe, very few people are
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 09:02:13AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Chris G [06-24-10 08:10]:
> > I'm getting the feeling that, maybe, very few people are now using
> > mutt with mbox so that an 'out of the box' installation of mutt on
> > Linux works fine with maildir but if you switch to mbox
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 03:05:14PM +0200, Christian Ebert wrote:
>I can't reproduce this, neither with $check_mbox_size set or
>unser. Unless, of course, I copy a message that is flagged as
>New.
I've seen this sporadically when receiving new email, reading it, then
restarting mutt later or return
* Chip Camden [06-24-10 11:55]:
>
> I use mutt with mbox format, but I'm still on 1.4 (FreeBSD port). This
> thread makes me a bit uneasy about the eventual portupgrade.
>
I wouldn't be. I have used mbox for many years and I move the the latest
available version of mutt, immediately. I have
On Jun 24 22:29, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:08:07PM +0100, Chris G wrote:
> > >
> > I'm getting the feeling that, maybe, very few people are now using
> > mutt with mbox so that an 'out of the box' installation of mutt on
> > Linux works fine with maildir but if you swit
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 02:48:15PM +0100, Chris G wrote:
> > > Getting back to your problem I have just realised something, when you
> > > copy a mail message to another mailbox it *is* a new message in that
> > > mailbox. I have just tried it and I get exactly the same symptoms that
> > > you repo
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 03:05:14PM +0200, Christian Ebert wrote:
> * Chris G on Thursday, June 24, 2010 at 13:45:26 +0100
> > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:29:25PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:08:07PM +0100, Chris G wrote:
> >>> I'm getting the feeling that, maybe, v
* Chris G on Thursday, June 24, 2010 at 13:45:26 +0100
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:29:25PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:08:07PM +0100, Chris G wrote:
>>> I'm getting the feeling that, maybe, very few people are now using
>>> mutt with mbox so that an 'out of the bo
* Chris G [06-24-10 08:10]:
> I'm getting the feeling that, maybe, very few people are now using
> mutt with mbox so that an 'out of the box' installation of mutt on
> Linux works fine with maildir but if you switch to mbox it all goes
> very much awry.
I think not. I have used mbox for many yea
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:29:25PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:08:07PM +0100, Chris G wrote:
> > >
> > I'm getting the feeling that, maybe, very few people are now using
> > mutt with mbox so that an 'out of the box' installation of mutt on
> > Linux works fine wit
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:08:07PM +0100, Chris G wrote:
> >
> I'm getting the feeling that, maybe, very few people are now using
> mutt with mbox so that an 'out of the box' installation of mutt on
> Linux works fine with maildir but if you switch to mbox it all goes
> very much awry.
Oh-oh, tha
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 09:32:38PM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:28:24PM +0200, Michael Ludwig wrote:
> > Erik Christiansen schrieb am 24.06.2010 um 19:18 (+1000):
> > > Since upgrading to ubuntu 10.04, and therefore Mutt 1.5.20, saving a
> > > read mail to another ma
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:28:24PM +0200, Michael Ludwig wrote:
> Erik Christiansen schrieb am 24.06.2010 um 19:18 (+1000):
> > Since upgrading to ubuntu 10.04, and therefore Mutt 1.5.20, saving a
> > read mail to another mailbox immediately causes that mailbox to be
> > flagged as containing new m
Erik Christiansen schrieb am 24.06.2010 um 19:18 (+1000):
> Since upgrading to ubuntu 10.04, and therefore Mutt 1.5.20, saving a
> read mail to another mailbox immediately causes that mailbox to be
> flagged as containing new mail. Since I'm using the same .muttrc,
> something has changed between m
18 matches
Mail list logo
