From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/11403 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Franklin Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: TODO idea: Date: 19 Jun 1997 10:37:43 -0700 Sender: paul@cs.washington.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035151116 30037 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:58:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:58:36 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from sandy.calag.com (root@sandy [206.190.83.128]) by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA25146 for ; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 19:28:51 -0700 Original-Received: from deanna.miranova.com (root@deanna [206.190.83.1]) by sandy.calag.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA01389 for ; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 19:29:27 -0700 Original-Received: from xemacs.org (xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu [128.174.252.16]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA05790 for ; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 19:29:35 -0700 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA11501 for ; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 21:28:33 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from claymore.vcinet.com (claymore.vcinet.com [208.205.12.23]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 19:37:49 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 23786 invoked by uid 504); 19 Jun 1997 17:37:48 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 23783 invoked from network); 19 Jun 1997 17:37:47 -0000 Original-Received: from calvin.cs.washington.edu (128.95.1.10) by claymore.vcinet.com with SMTP; 19 Jun 1997 17:37:47 -0000 Original-Received: (paul@localhost) by calvin.cs.washington.edu (8.6.12/7.2ws+) id KAA18308; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:37:44 -0700 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Wesley Hardaker's message of 19 Jun 1997 10:47:38 +0200 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.39/Emacs 19.34 Original-Lines: 35 Original-Xref: altair.xemacs.org dgnus-list:1793 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:11403 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:11403 >>>>> Wesley Hardaker writes: > Add the possibility (ie, a toggle) > into nnml to generate the .mh_sequence file (very trivial really) or > create a new backend like nnmlmh instead that was a conglomerate of > both backends. How well does the nnoo stuff work, he says with an > evil grin, can you do nnmhml = nnmh&nnml and then overwrite the > necessary pieces? (grin) Hmm. I thought the proposal was to use slocal or procmail or something else to deliver mail & update .mh_sequence files; gnus would then scan these files for unseen mail. Personally, I'm against this because it will make things worse for people with slow (networked) file systems like me. (Having one file per nnml spool, similar to the active file, seems promising to me.) And you have to solve the last message removal problem for this to work well. You seem to want to do this the other way around, which would mean that mh won't see your mail unless you have gnus running and a gnus daemon getting your mail for you, meaning you have to hope emacs or the machine it's running on doesn't die, but it could work. Oh, I just read your example. You want _both_ directions. That means you have to solve all of the aforementioned problems (except gnus daemons) plus figure out how to lock the .mh_sequence files. I would assume mh already does this? I think "very trivial really" couldn't be farther from the truth. If I remember right, nnml is directly on top of nnmh, which means that nnml == nnml+nnmh. I tried to understand the nnoo stuff last summer and failed; I may try again soon. --Paul