Re: another silly question
On 2005-05-04 10:46:38 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> 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.
This is not a problem, as mailboxes created by Mutt (e.g. for postpone
or user archives) will normally be read only by Mutt. Even if maildir
is the default, Mutt can still work with mbox mailboxes created at
system level (incoming mailboxes) for instance.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA