On Tue Jul 10 2012 Sam Steingold wrote: > > It appears that binding bbdb-allow-duplicates to t is the easiest > > solution here. > > Thanks. Is it seriously expected that one's internet acquaintances > should have unique names?
>From the docstring of bbdb-allow-duplicates (which I did not change) I assume that the assumption that names are unique has been present in BBDB for quite some time. The assumption certainly underlies all bbdb-mua-* commands and functions. You need to rewrite these BBDB internals if you do not want to make this assumption. (I say "you" because I do not see a particularly high priority for doing this. BBDB has served many people well for many years with this assumption.) > when bbdb sees a message from <foo@...> without a name, it insists on > adding foo to name or aka. I would like to avoid that. Bind bbdb-message-mail-as-name to nil, if you do not like that. This user variable was introduced following your request. You can always add a name by hand that you find more meaningful (or use bbdb-create-hook if you want to do that automagically). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
