Re: [Nmh-workers] Nmh status - working on nmh (mailutils)

[Jon Steinhart]

> Chad Walstrom <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > Neil W Rickert wrote:
> > > nmh is rotten at the core.  There is a lot of cruft, and probably
> > > buffer overflows galore in the many library routines.
> > 
> > Please excuse my blasphemous inquiry.  Has anyone looked at the GNU
> > project "mailutils"?
> 
> Yes, we (the MH-E project) have added GNU mailutils support so its MH
> support appears to be complete. I haven't personally used it though.
> 
> I don't know if GNU mailutils would be a good next-generation nmh or
> not. Perhaps someone might be able to expand upon this.

I seem to recall (an I may be wrong here), that mailutils did a
one-folder-per-file thing, instead on nmh's one-message-per-file.
I don't want to lose one-message-per-file, it's one of nmh's great strengths.

Jon