On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 10:48 -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Roger Oberholtzer
[06-04-10 02:43]: On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 14:52 -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
Mutt "sees" the msg but it is *not* "new", access time has changed.
Exactly as I thought. So mutt is not doing this in the most robust manner. Because from the mail reading pov, the message is indeed new.
Indeed, the mail is unread but also not "new". It *has* been accessed. The system has no way to indicate that the access was by the intended reader, your neighbor, the cat or another program. Computers are not yet that "intelligent". But you are "picking hairs". Mutt has performed in this manner for many years and that manner has been acceptable to its users.
I agree that people have used mutt with this crappy design feature, and most will continue to use it with no problems. But programmers do indeed have more "intelligent" ways to tell that a specific program has been the one to read a file. Computers are indeed "intelligent" enough to handle this logic - if programmers are "intelligent" enough to tell them to do so! IMAP does it all the time. I would suggest that folk who want to tweak that last bit of 'performance' from their file system(1) remove noatime to speed up the file system (2) drop mutt until it fixes it's rather incorrect method of determining if mutt has accessed a file. Of course, that won't happen. -- Roger Oberholtzer OPQ Systems / Ramböll RST Ramböll Sverige AB Krukmakargatan 21 P.O. Box 17009 SE-104 62 Stockholm, Sweden Office: Int +46 10-615 60 20 Mobile: Int +46 70-815 1696 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org