Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (933 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] openSUSE on SSD?
  • From: Roger Oberholtzer <roger@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 08:48:43 +0200
  • Message-id: <1275893323.28023.16.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 10:48 -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Roger Oberholtzer <roger@xxxxxx> [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

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@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >