numb@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Newman) (03/16/90)
I currently use 7.0.4 for reading & sending of mail. At our site we have our own home grown mail reader which has seen better days (8 years old). But one of its major advantages over other mail readers that I have seen is that it has index files, so the startup on a large folder is very much quicker than the likes of mush. Has/Is anyone developed(ing) index files for mush. I have looked at the load_folder code and it would be quite easy to implement indexes. If noone is doing this then I shall write the code myself. -- ARPA: numb%cs.qmw.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk | Matthew Simon Philip Newman JANET: numb@uk.ac.qmw.cs | QMW, University of London UUCP: numb@qmw-cs.uucp | Computer Science Dept AppleL: UK0087 | Mile End Road Voice: +44 1 975 5233 (Direct Dial) | London E1 4NS, UK Fax: +44 1 980 6533 "To imagine is everything. - Albert Einstein"
schaefer@ogicse.ogi.edu (Barton E. Schaefer) (03/17/90)
In article <1792@sequent.cs.qmw.ac.uk> numb@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Newman) writes: } Has/Is anyone developed(ing) index files for mush. I have looked at the } load_folder code and it would be quite easy to implement indexes. If noone is } doing this then I shall write the code myself. Index files are in the plans for the future. If we add them, we will do it right: mush will be able to detect when the folder or the index has been "corrupted" and revert to an "ordinary" load in that case. This is non-trivial to add to the present load_folder(), which is why it hasn't yet been done. -- Bart Schaefer "EARTH: Surrender IMMEDIATELY or we PICKLE DAN QUAYLE" "THPPFT!" schaefer@cse.ogi.edu (used to be cse.ogc.edu)