On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 05:03:42PM -0600, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > On Thursday, November 12 at 02:44 PM, quoth Robert Holtzman: > > Since, to my knowledge, for a mailbox to be shown in the sidebar it > > must be included in the list of mailboxes and inclusion means it > > will be checked, the answer is...all. If I'm wrong please correct > > me. > > Ohhhhhh, you're using the sidebar patch? Ick. Well, it's quite likely > that the sidebar patch changes the behavior I described. To get > details on it, though, you'll have to ask the patch's authors (who, > last I checked, refuse to support their patch).
The only reason I'm running the sidebar is that I'm used to pine/alpine where the mailbox list is a click away. Don't know how the unpatched mutt handles this but if the authors don't support their patch I will probably at least try the unpatched version. Educate me (as if you haven't been doing that so far). Why "ick"? > > >> Depends on the status/condition of your hard drive. For example, if > >> your OS can cache all of the necessary meta data and inodes, it > >> doesn't have to check the disk every time... but if it cannot cache > >> them (for whatever reason, such as "doing lots of other disk > >> operations at the time", for example, if its rebuilding/maintaining > >> a search index or something), then it has to touch the disk to > >> check up on those files. > > > > Not sure if this applies. The processes you mention all seem to be ram > > and/or swap dependent. 2Gb should be sufficient. Again, if I'm wrong a > > correction would be appreciated. > > Rebuilding a search index (for example, the `locate` function on > linux/BSD or something even more comprehensive, like MacOS's > "Spotlight" feature) is DEFINITELY disk-dependent, and has little to > do with your RAM. Secondly, you may be unaware, but some disks > actually have their own hardware cache (which behaves like RAM, but is > hidden from the OS). > > > 1.5.17 which is the one in the ubuntu repo. > > Umm... well, according to Ubuntu's web page, 1.5.20 is the one in > their repo (http://packages.ubuntu.com/karmic/mutt). 1.5.17 is about > three years old, and may very well still have the bug I mentioned (I > don't see mention of it in mutt's UPDATING file, though). I'm running 8.04 (hardy). Had problems with 8.10 and 9.04. I'm waiting for the initial problems with 9.10 to be worked out before trying it. I also run debian lenny but haven't tried mutt on it yet. -- Bob Holtzman Key ID: 8D549279 "If you think you're getting free lunch, check the price of the beer"
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
