Ken> export MHCONTEXT context-$$ .. I live and learn, thanks.
Ken> in the above scenario, what do you EXPECT nmh to do? Well, from experience, I expect it to do what I tell it, even if that's not what I intend :-/ My preference would be for actions (rmm, refile, repl) to note there's been a context change and ask for confirmation, I think. The machine is better than I am at tracking consistency. If context-in-this-window and most-recent-context are different (or more particularly, the action target (cur, most likely) differs between the two contexts), then there is a significant chance I'm trying to do something other than what I appear to be doing. [Paul's use of -nochangecur noted with thanks; also noticed its use in a script recently posted to the list] Another scenario (which I've gotten under control by iron discipline) is that I sync my home directory among a variety of machines, several of which can receive email. This more-or-less corresponds to the IMAP situation I think: a folder can change under your feet because synchronisation updates the folder with state change from another machine. Taken to its ultimate conclusion, that means that context actually should record both the full sequence of message-IDs (say) in all folders *and* all mh_sequences. As has been mentioned, that could impact performance. Wouldn't a similar consistency check catch IMAP changes too (contingent on the suggested UUID <-> local number mapping)? Conrad _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers