On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 03:56:06PM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote: > Like many people's, my incoming mail is routed off into various folders > by the MTA which I then read with mutt. The problem is that while mutt's > mail folder handling is pretty darn good it's still a pain for it to > scan the folders[1]. There are about a dozen I like to read throughout > the day.
This is what I do too, but I agree that there is still a problem waiting for a really good solution. > How do people deal with this appalling modern dilemma? One hack I've > considered is saving duplicates of my interesting folders into one > folder which I set to threaded display & read as a stream as it comes I tried this ... > in. This leaves the hassle of having lots of other folders with unread > messages (so perhaps a script that marks those as read based on > message-id's -- anyone seen/done this?). Anyone played with/heard ... but for me the problems outweighed he benefits. > about putting mail itself in RDBMS? That way you could create virtual > folders etc. I've heard talk of this, but never seen a good implementation. > While I'm on this subject, how do people deal with searching email? > Archival management? (And how that impacts searching?) I will write up a > Web page on all this seeded on whatever comes out of this, if there > isn't one already. I have a script that I occasionally run which turns london.pm into london.pm.20011002.bz2 for example. I use it on log files too. My high tech archival searching goes something like bz2cat london.pm.20011002.bz2 | less /interesting_stuff nnnnnnn or bz2cat london.pm.20011002.bz2 | gvim - gives the syntax colouring. Occasionally I'll just decompress the file and load it into mutt, if I want to follow the thread for example. No, it's not nice. -- Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pjcj.net
