On Saturday, 17 July 2004 at 07:41, TAKAHASHI Tamotsu wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 04:25:05PM +0200, Thomas Glanzmann wrote: > > > - const char *want_headers > > > + const char *want_headers > > > > ... maybe you should also add the new spam header as well when submit > > the patch upstream. > > Well, then, we have to make a new variable. Here is two untested patches. > (Header cache mechanism should dump these values and check them > before restoring?) It should be obvious that the first of these two patches (the one that appends headers to the fixed list instead of replacing it) is far preferable. Allowing users to remove headers mutt depends on to create the index is begging for trouble.
Attachment:
pgpjKQGqbjxRw.pgp
Description: PGP signature