"mailboxes" syntax?

According to the mutt manual, the correct usage for identifying folders
that can receive new mail is:

Usage: [un]mailboxes [!]filename [ filename ... ].

On my setup all incoming mails are sorted by procmail and delivered to
folders that start with "IN". However, the ".muttrc" mailboxes entry
"=IN.*" achieves nothing.

Do the folders need to be identified individually in order to access the
"mailboxes" feature?

Felix Karpfen
--
Felix Karpfen
Public Key 72FDF9DF (DH/DSA)

Hi Felix,

* Felix Karpfen on Wednesday, June 11, 2008:
> According to the mutt manual, the correct usage for identifying folders
> that can receive new mail is:
>
> Usage: [un]mailboxes [!]filename [ filename ... ].
>
> On my setup all incoming mails are sorted by procmail and delivered to
> folders that start with "IN". However, the ".muttrc" mailboxes entry
> "=IN.*" achieves nothing.
>
> Do the folders need to be identified individually in order to access the
> "mailboxes" feature?

Yes. But you can work around this eg. by using backticks:

mailboxes `echo ~/Mail/IN.*`

or

mailboxes `printf ' %s' ~/Mail/IN.*`

Of course printf or echo don't know about Mutt's = shortcut. But
you get the idea.

c
--
Was heißt hier Dogma, ich bin Underdogma!
[ What the hell do you mean dogma, I am underdogma. ]

_F R E E_ _V I D E O S_ -->> http://www.blacktrash.org/underdogma/

* Felix Karpfen wrote :
> According to the mutt manual, the correct usage for identifying folders
> that can receive new mail is:
>
> Usage: [un]mailboxes [!]filename [ filename ... ].
>
> On my setup all incoming mails are sorted by procmail and delivered to
> folders that start with "IN". However, the ".muttrc" mailboxes entry
> "=IN.*" achieves nothing.
>
> Do the folders need to be identified individually in order to access the
> "mailboxes" feature?

The muttrc doesn't recognise the * wildcard, but you can do this:

------------------------------------------------
mailboxes `echo /home/troy/mail/*`
unmailboxes `echo /home/troy/mail/sent/*` \
~/mail/junk \
~/mail/trash
-----------------------------------------------

--
Troy Piggins | http://piggo.com/~troy _ /|/
|\__/ Oo,
( \\ D
Mutt 1.5.18 (with rr.compressed & vvv.nntp patches) L\-\L`\/|

On 2008-06-11, Christian Ebert <blacktrash@gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi Felix,
>
> * Felix Karpfen on Wednesday, June 11, 2008:
>>
>>
>> Do the folders need to be identified individually in order to access the
>> "mailboxes" feature?
>
> Yes. But you can work around this eg. by using backticks:
>
> mailboxes `echo ~/Mail/IN.*`
>
> or
>
> mailboxes `printf ' %s' ~/Mail/IN.*`
>
> Of course printf or echo don't know about Mutt's = shortcut. But
> you get the idea.
>
Bad news.

Crowed too soon!

There is something in my setup that stops "mailboxes" from doing what
it should.

Neither of the above routines enable "mutt -y" to find any mailboxes
[The information line reads mailboxes (0)].

On the other hand, if I give the full names of my IN boxes to the
"mailboxes" entry in .muttrc, then "mutt -y" displays *all* the listed
mailboxes - not just the mailboxes that have new mail.

In case it is relevant, I use "mrxvt" as my terminal for running "mutt"
in a JWM windowsmanager environment.

Felix Karpfen
--
Felix Karpfen
Public Key 72FDF9DF (DH/DSA)