On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 06:30:03PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote: > NO INHERENT MEANING TO ANY EXIT CODE, IN THE GENERAL CASE. THERE IS ONLY > A CONVENTION ON HOW TO INTERPRET THEM. Many programs conform to this Which suggests that programs which violate the convention should be fixed. There's a convention on how mbox files should be written, but no standard AFAICR. > like the third or 4th time now) end users should never be required to > be programmers of any sort, even lowly wrapper script programmers, in Realistically, anybody who uses mutt is pretty likely to be able to put together a shell script. mutt is - various arguments aside - *not* a tool for people who aren't able/willing to customise various aspects of their system. Never has been, never will be. -- Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature