<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: mutt cache sensitivity



On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 12:20:52PM +0000, Rocco Rutte wrote:

> Once we find a solution for aborted writes, I think the user is
> responsible for maintaince of the cache as he's it now for header cache
> too.

And this is one of the reasons I don't like the header cache much. It makes
things faster, but I'm kind of uncomfortable with the number of people
coming up in the last X months with reports of segfaults who've been told to
delete their cache and restart. It makes mutt significantly more fragile.

I also personally believe that if a program is going to have a cache, it
should maintain it, not the user. Firefox, IE, Opera, Outlook, Pegasus etc.
don't just grow caches without bound.

-- 
Paul

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature