Ken> You run command (a) which changes the context. How is command (b) Ken> supposed to know that the context has been changed?
Given your mentioning of MHCONTEXT, I could envisage a wrapper for MH commands much like Paul Fox's example — perhaps a context directory containing per-shell-PID context files, and the crucial test would be whether another context file was more recent than and different to this shell's one when you take an action. There's a problem there though, in that context only records your current folder, with sequences being folder-local — so a sortm in one shell could render a previous scan in another shell obsolete. Trying to solve that by merging all sequences up into context would introduce other difficulties: for example sortm would have to rewrite *all* context+sequence records containing sequences affected by the sort. The difficulty of tracking that probably renders Paul's approach ("Something happened somewhere else — you're about to affect message(s) X — are you sure?") safer. I don't use other message stores, but it seems to me that maintaining a map of MH unique IDs to another store could be quite closely related, and perhaps Paul's approach would still apply: it's simple and safe, although it could be inconvenient if "third party" changes couldn't be tracked at a sufficiently fine granularity. Conrad _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers