--- Michael Torrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gary Thornock wrote:
>> --- Michael Torrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Yeah, pine sucks doesn't it. :)  Guess it's better than
>>> /usr/bin/mail.
>> 
>> No, it's not!
>> 
>> Although, neither one holds a candle to /usr/local/bin/elm :)
>
> Hmm.  Wasn't pine created because elm sucked so bad?  Pine
> Is Not Elm? :) Pine was a leap forward from elm.  I used
> to use elm all the time (mainly because it was better than
> /usr/bin/mail).  Then I discovered the goodness that was Pine.
> Not to mention (I have repented, I swear!)  Pico.

Yes, Pine was created because someone didn't like elm.  Pine
Is Not Elm, and that's Pine's major shortcoming :)

It's getting harder and harder to find a copy of the elm source
code (though, fortunately, I have my own copy in a safe place).
I suppose I should learn my way around mutt one of these days,
but as long as elm does what I want (which it does), I don't
really have much motivation to do so.

--------------------
BYU Unix Users Group 
http://uug.byu.edu/ 

The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their
author.  They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. 
___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/mailman/listinfo/uug-list

Reply via email to