[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
What's the state of the art for mail?
From: |
kj |
Subject: |
What's the state of the art for mail? |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Jun 2004 17:36:17 -0000 |
User-agent: |
nn/6.6.5 |
After all these years good ol' RMAIL's limitations are *finally*
getting to me. I've stuck with it mostly out of inertia, and
because it works well with Emacs.
My main concerns are to be able to use Emacs (or a faithful Emacs-like
interface) to read my mail on Linux, to have no problems with MIME
attachments, and no BABYL! (Availability of a Debian package is
always a plus.)
Thanks for your suggestions!
kj
PS: I'm a bit leery about MH, mostly because a friend of mine who
has used exmh for almost 10 years tells me that its MIME handling
is a little bit long in the tooth. In particular, she noted that
one needs to jump through hoops to make the quoting of messages
that have MIME attachments work right.
--
NOTE: In my address everything before the period is backwards.
- What's the state of the art for mail?,
kj <=
- Re: What's the state of the art for mail?, Mike Irwin, 2004/06/29
- Re: What's the state of the art for mail?, Bill Wohler, 2004/06/29
- Re: What's the state of the art for mail?, kj, 2004/06/29
- Re: What's the state of the art for mail?, Tassilo Horn, 2004/06/29
- Re: What's the state of the art for mail?, Xavier Maillard, 2004/06/29