[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Nmh status - working on nmh (mailutils)
From: |
Jon Steinhart |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Nmh status - working on nmh (mailutils) |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Sep 2004 07:45:02 -0700 |
> Chad Walstrom <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > Neil W Rickert wrote:
> > > nmh is rotten at the core. There is a lot of cruft, and probably
> > > buffer overflows galore in the many library routines.
> >
> > Please excuse my blasphemous inquiry. Has anyone looked at the GNU
> > project "mailutils"?
>
> Yes, we (the MH-E project) have added GNU mailutils support so its MH
> support appears to be complete. I haven't personally used it though.
>
> I don't know if GNU mailutils would be a good next-generation nmh or
> not. Perhaps someone might be able to expand upon this.
I seem to recall (an I may be wrong here), that mailutils did a
one-folder-per-file thing, instead on nmh's one-message-per-file.
I don't want to lose one-message-per-file, it's one of nmh's great strengths.
Jon