Re: Reliably detecting/counting new mail. WAS:[Re: Default mailbox display? [partially solved]]

2001-01-23 Thread Dave Pearson
On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 11:30:57AM +0100, Heinrich Langos wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 03:53:44PM +, Dave Pearson wrote: > > > With an attitude like that it's not surprising that you're confused > > about what I've been saying. Read what I've actually said, look for the > > reasonable reas

Re: Reliably detecting/counting new mail. WAS:[Re: Default mailbox display? [partially solved]]

2001-01-23 Thread Heinrich Langos
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 03:53:44PM +, Dave Pearson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 04:16:25PM +0100, Heinrich Langos wrote: > > > Dave, you may stop reading. The rest will only bother you and further > > waste your time. > > With an attitude like that it's not surprising that you're confuse

Re: Reliably detecting/counting new mail. WAS:[Re: Default mailbox display? [partially solved]]

2001-01-22 Thread Dave Pearson
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 04:16:25PM +0100, Heinrich Langos wrote: > Dave, you may stop reading. The rest will only bother you and further > waste your time. With an attitude like that it's not surprising that you're confused about what I've been saying. Read what I've actually said, look for the

Reliably detecting/counting new mail. WAS:[Re: Default mailbox display? [partially solved]]

2001-01-22 Thread Heinrich Langos
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 01:10:46PM +, Dave Pearson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 01:34:03PM +0100, Heinrich Langos wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 08:07:58PM +, Dave Pearson wrote: > [...] > > it's not only me who wants mutt to behave that way, i guess. if it was not > > the inten