* On 2002.06.08, in <20020608212345.GB4832@sumida>,
* "Kevin Coyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't want to start a religious war, but is there consensus opinion
> as to whether mbox or Maildir is better? I know mutt supports both
> automatically, so it's probably a bit of a mute q
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 05:23:45PM -0400, Kevin Coyner wrote:
>
> I don't want to start a religious war, but is there consensus opinion
> as to whether mbox or Maildir is better? I know mutt supports both
> automatically, so it's probably a bit of a mute question, but mutt
> also gives you the o
--G4iJoqBmSsgzjUCe
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
* Kevin Coyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2002-06-08 23:34 -0400:
>=20
> I don't want to start a religious war, but is there consensus opinion
> as to whether mbox or M
Hi,
* Kevin Coyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [02-06-08 23:23]:
>I don't want to start a religious war, but is there consensus opinion
>as to whether mbox or Maildir is better? I know mutt supports both
>automatically, so it's probably a bit of a mute question, but mutt
>also gives you the option of sp
I don't want to start a religious war, but is there consensus opinion
as to whether mbox or Maildir is better? I know mutt supports both
automatically, so it's probably a bit of a mute question, but mutt
also gives you the option of specifying which format new folders are
set up in, so I thought
* David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Thomas --
>
> :set mbox_type=Maildir
> T.
> ;C/tmp/TestMailFolder/
Thanks.
> Well, let's see, here... Now I'm finally curious. First I opened
> my big funnies folder and converted it to Maildir; on about 9400
> messages that took mutt about 7 minutes
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 02:03:36PM -0500, Tim Legant wrote:
> Note the requirement to use the hostname. Note that procmail doesn't.
> Procmail is broken.
Does on mine:
_vz.z77T7.titanium
[breser@titanium new]$ hostname
titanium
[breser@titanium new]$ procmail -v
procmail v3.14 1999/11/22, Copyr
So sprach »Magnus Bodin« am 2001-07-15 um 21:38:49 +0200 :
> I agree however, that the procmail filenames are ugly.
How do real maildir filenames look like? In reality, that is - we all
heard the spec :)
Alexander Skwar
--
How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (engl
So sprach »Tim Legant« am 2001-07-15 um 14:03:36 -0500 :
> "Okay, so you're writing messages. A unique name has three pieces,
> separated by dots. On the left is the result of time(). On the right is
> the result of gethostname(). In the middle is something that doesn't
> repeat within one
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 02:03:36PM -0500, Tim Legant wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 08:31:44PM +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 07:51:18PM -0500, Tim Legant wrote:
> > > Procmail is severely broken in its creation of file names for maildirs.
> > > If procmail correctly foll
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 08:31:44PM +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 07:51:18PM -0500, Tim Legant wrote:
> > Procmail is severely broken in its creation of file names for maildirs.
> > If procmail correctly followed the specification for maildirs,
> > duplicates would be impossi
On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 07:51:18PM -0500, Tim Legant wrote:
> >
> > 995153880.17759_1.teich
> > 995153880.17760_1.teich
> > 995153880.17761_1.teich
> >
>
> Procmail is severely broken in its creation of file names for maildirs.
> If procmail correctly followed the specification for maildirs
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 01:42:03AM +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> So sprach »Walt Mankowski« am 2001-07-13 um 19:04:43 -0400 :
> > Maildirs have some neat advantages of their own. For example it's
> > very easy to merge two folders together. I send mail from my laptop,
>
> Hmm, dunno, but I f
So sprach »Walt Mankowski« am 2001-07-13 um 19:04:43 -0400 :
> Maildirs have some neat advantages of their own. For example it's
> very easy to merge two folders together. I send mail from my laptop,
Hmm, dunno, but I find a cat old_mbox >> current_mbox also quite easy.
Dunno how maildir names
Brett Coon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 20 Jun 2000:
> Hmm, to the extent that MH format is like Maildir, my experience
> is contrary to your claim that saving changes is faster in a
> one-message-per-file format. I found that closing mutt took
> several times longer with MH tha
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:33:31 EDT, Bennett Todd wrote:
>Back to our muttons, the above performance discussion focused on
>opening the folder. Once it's open, mutt has built an in-memory data
>structure describing the messages, and either their offsets in the
>mbox file, or the filenames where the
2000-06-21-01:17:34 Ronny Haryanto:
> I'm still wondering why it's slower though (in general), maybe
> because it fopen() more times than mbox? The mailbox is on ext2fs
> if that makes any difference.
Ext2 is a nice quick FS, with many great features. One of my
favourites.
For any size mailbox,
Mikko Hänninen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Chris Gushue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 15 May 2000:
> > How much
> > of a speed difference would there be between that and mbox?
>
> I think this is really rather subjective and per-system issue, whatever
> figures someone else might come up wit
Chris Gushue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 15 May 2000:
> How much
> of a speed difference would there be between that and mbox?
I think this is really rather subjective and per-system issue, whatever
figures someone else might come up with on their system might be totally
off the mark on you
Maildir is sounding more interesting to me all the time, with support for
it in procmail (can't remember if I knew about that before or not). How much
of a speed difference would there be between that and mbox? I'm currently
reading my mail on my 486 Linux box, and speed would be the main issue. I
20 matches
Mail list logo
