windley@iris.ucdavis.edu (Phil Windley) (11/04/87)
Does anyone use emacs with mh (mail handler)? I would like to be able to invoke mh from within a currently running emacs process instead of suspending emacs and typing comp, only to have to wait for another emacs process to start. Any help would be appreciated. Also, we recently switched to a new news program here, rn, and it doesn't seem to work within emacs. Does anyone have an el file that make rn work in emacs? Phil Windley Robotics Research Lab University of California, Davis
allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery) (11/08/87)
As quoted from <437@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> by windley@iris.ucdavis.edu (Phil Windley): +--------------- | Does anyone use emacs with mh (mail handler)? I would like to be able | to invoke mh from within a currently running emacs process instead of | suspending emacs and typing comp, only to have to wait for another | emacs process to start. Any help would be appreciated. +--------------- Try M-X mh-smail. Or M-X mh-smail-other-window, if you prefer. I have rebound C-Xm, C-Xs, and C-X4s to invoke the MH stuff instead of RMAIL. In case you're interested, the lisp sources are in $EMACS/lisp/mh-e.el. I have a question about mh-e, by the way: I can't see a way to get out of it without doing a switch-to-buffer (C-xb) and naming the buffer; I have kluged around this for now by having C-xr call a function which saves the current buffer in a variable and calling mh-rmail, then setting up an mh-folder-mode-hook which binds 'q' to a function which restores the original buffer after doing a (bury-buffer (current-buffer)). But this leaves (other-buffer) as "scan-+inbox"; I could (bury-buffer (other-buffer)) as well, but what if there are other mh-rmail buffers as well? (Please don't tell me to RTFM; no manual as yet, I'll have to order one.) -- Brandon S. Allbery necntc!ncoast!allbery@harvard.harvard.edu {harvard!necntc,well!hoptoad,sun!mandrill!hal,uunet!hnsurg3}!ncoast!allbery Moderator of comp.sources.misc "This... is the helm." "Unless there've been some changes I don't know about!"
larus@homer.Berkeley.EDU.berkeley.edu (James Larus) (11/09/87)
>I have a question about mh-e, by the way: I can't see a way to get out of >it without doing a switch-to-buffer (C-xb) and naming the buffer; I have >kluged around this for now by having C-xr call a function which saves the >current buffer in a variable and calling mh-rmail, then setting up an >mh-folder-mode-hook which binds 'q' to a function which restores the original >buffer after doing a (bury-buffer (current-buffer)). But this leaves >(other-buffer) as "scan-+inbox"; I could (bury-buffer (other-buffer)) as well, >but what if there are other mh-rmail buffers as well? (Please don't tell me >to RTFM; no manual as yet, I'll have to order one.) >-- >Brandon S. Allbery necntc!ncoast!allbery@harvard.harvard.edu > {harvard!necntc,well!hoptoad,sun!mandrill!hal,uunet!hnsurg3}!ncoast!allbery > Moderator of comp.sources.misc You are correct, you can't get out of mh-e (chuckle, chuckle). It is designed like other environments in GNU emacs: the commands are associated with a buffer and you "quit" by killing the buffer or changing buffers. mh-e is a bit more complicated since it generally has more than one buffer (e.g., show-+inbox). The latest and greatest version of mh-e ameilorates this problem by burying these buffers. Hence, you can read your mail and then go back to what you were doing by ^X-b. /Jim ucbvax!larus larus@ginger.Berkeley.EDU