Bardur Arantsson wrote:
Tamotsu Takahashi wrote:On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 09:14:13AM +0100, Bardur Arantsson wrote:
[--snip--]
"Similar options for <copy> and <save> functions?"Actually, I like that idea quite a lot... They do make sense if one thinks of this patch as a sort of "poor man's virtual folders" type thing... (perhaps just combine them all into one 'poor_mans_virtual_folders' option?). It should just be a question of inserting a symlink resolution function call in appropriate places for MH/Maildir mailboxes.
From testing it appears that mutt actually *does* follow symlinks when copying/saving messages -- it seems to actually open the messages and read their contents instead of just blindly copying files, so this happens as a byproduct of mutt generally being ignorant of symlinks.
So having an unlink_follow would actually bring deletion in line with general mutt behavior. :)
I know, it could still be done using your pass-to-command patch, but this patch makes it is less error-prone for users, and they don't have to use different 'delete' commands depending on whether they're in a "symlink" mailbox or not... for me that makes it worth it.
Cheers,
--
Bardur Arantsson
<bardur@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
<bardur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it,
poorly.
Henry Spencer