On 2000.05.25, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"David DeSimone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > That's good as an option, but then the problem would be that you can't
> > have an independent stand-alone binary that works even with no
> > resource files...
>
> Is this really one of the design goals of Mutt? I don't see a problem
I don't know, but it's a useful (though not strictly necessary) fallback.
> with getting people used to the idea that there must be a system-Muttrc,
> and it should be copied wherever Mutt gets copied. That way, if a site
> has policies like domain-names and hidden-hosts, they won't get lost
> just because someone copies the Mutt binary somewhere else. Perhaps
> Mutt should simply fail to start without some sort of configuration
> input. :)
Seems to me that the correct solution -- if you want to make this
patch, anyway -- is not to change the default settings at all, but to
make them active only when there's no system Muttrc.
I'm uncertain how useful this is, though. To me, the best advantage of
eliminating defaults is not having to unbind lots of stuff in your own
files. But if the system Muttrc is going to make the same bindings,
anyway, where's the gain?
Maybe the original poster (I forgot who...) would be OK with
"unbind * *" and "unmacro * *".
--
-D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] NSIT University of Chicago
