On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 04:19:17PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2005-05-03 13:18:52 -0500, David Champion wrote: > > That's not quite right. Mbox has often been recommended, just not as > > a one-step solution to the same set of problems. Each format has > > strengths, and each has weaknesses. I use both, I like using both, > > and I think mbox is the best default for any UNIX mailer that aims > > to be broadly usable. > > Why would this make Mutt more broadly usable? Because the default mail application available on most Unix systems often supports mbox, but not maildir. IIRC, sendmail's mail.local delivery agent doesn't support maildir, but only mbox -- procmail may not be available. Many users live in environments where maildir isn't an option, at least not without the effort of installing a lot of software... which may not actually be possible for various reasons. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thank the spammers.
Attachment:
pgpihqGLDBe0t.pgp
Description: PGP signature