Re: Deleted mails to a folder
On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 12:13:57 +0100, Michael Tatge sent:
>* On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 Pete Johns (paj-mutt@xxxx) muttered:
>>On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 05:09:24 +0100, Michael Tatge sent:
>>>* On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 I (Michael.Tatge@xxxx) muttered: Plus
>>>what happens when use the proposed macro solution to delete a
>>>message from the trash folder? ;)
>>Easy...
>>[From my .muttrc]
>># Send stuff to trashcan
>>################################################## folder-hook
>>. 'macro index \cd
>>"<untag-pattern>~A<enter><tag-thread><tag-prefix><save-message>=trash<enter>y"
>>folder-hook . 'macro index d "<save-message>=trash<enter>y" '
>>folder-hook . 'macro pager d "<save-message>=trash<enter>y" '
>>folder-hook =(spam|trash) 'macro index \cd <delete-thread>'
>>folder-hook =(spam|trash) 'macro index d <delete-message>'
>>folder-hook =(spam|trash) 'macro pager d <delete-message>'
>Exactly. As i said the patch is the much cleaner approach.
>
I think this is a point of preference.
I prefer the scripting approach as I find it's more flexible. I
in this example I can have mutt behave one way for a certain
group of folders (not just one) and a different way for all
others. More importantly than that, though, I can use the same
.muttrc on the various different systems I use without having to
patch mutt to behave the way I want it to. Portability is the
real advantage, here.
Courses for horses, I suppose.
Hopefully, the OP has found a suitable solution to their problem
now.
Best;
--paj
--
Pete Johns <http://johnsy.com/>
Tel/Fax numbers and IM information: <http://johnsy.com/contact/>
A Letter From NZ <http://johnsy.com/blog/?entry=20051026195500>