On Apr 2, 1:10am, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> Subject: Re: maildir and "You have new mail"
> According to Mark Delany:
> > At 11:16 PM Thursday 4/1/99, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> > >Would it be possible to define the method I decribed above as "the"
> > >method to check for new mail (for shells, status bars etc) and to also
> > >define that programs that actually scan cur/ and new/ should use utime()
> > >to reset the access time on those directories after the scan?
[...]
> The thing is how do I find out if the mail has been checked / read!
> I don't want to modify all possible MUAs. In fact, the MUAs already all
> scan new/ for a fact. So taking the atime of new/ is the natural way.
> I just want to make sure no additional programs ruin the atime of new/
how are you going to stop a user from `innocently' updating the
atime of new/ with the following command?
ls ~/Maildir/new
if one is taking the time to build a tool, they should follow
a standard protocol, but I don't think a robust protocol should
depend on a parameter as volatile as a directory's atime.
> My aim is to integrate Maildir into standard programs.
A very worthy goal.
> But first I need an answer on the new/atime thing - from djb, I guess
> as he would be the final authority on this.
DJB, please don't weaken the maildir protocol to the point where
I can't `safely' use ls(1).
Regards,
Lenny
> Mike.
> --
> Indifference will certainly be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
>-- End of excerpt from Miquel van Smoorenburg
--
Leonard Mastrototaro Systems Administrator Click3X New York
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 212-627-1900 http://www.click3x.com
"Yeah well ... The Dude abides." -- http://www.lebowski.com
