On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Bruce Sass wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 03:12:08PM -0800, Adam Shand wrote:
> > > pine, pico and pilot deb's are included in woody. you'll notice that the
> > > version numbers have an 'L' at the end of them. that signifi
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 03:12:08PM -0800, Adam Shand wrote:
> > pine, pico and pilot deb's are included in woody. you'll notice that the
> > version numbers have an 'L' at the end of them. that signifies (i
> > believe) that they are not an unmodifi
On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 03:12:08PM -0800, Adam Shand wrote:
>
> > You can search the archives to find a link to the deb. There
> > are licensing issues with pine so Debian doesn't include it but
> > there are people who have built the debs. I just snagged the
> > latest stable re
Quoting Dwight Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> My condolences. I didn't realize you work at Stonehenge. :-)
Yep! BTW, from the Pine Info Center:
pine-bin.sun56 . . . . . . . . . Dec 5 16:53 9559k
which is 25% of my quota, whereas:
359784 Nov 11 1999 bin/mutt
> But then I think I would be at
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Johann Spies wrote:
> Another feature of mutt which I could not figure out with pine is the
> ability to check different mailboxes for new mail.
If you enable enable-incoming-folders and set incoming-folders to a list
of folder names and paths, you can use the TAB key to go t
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, David Wright wrote:
> Quoting Dwight Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > These issues concern people who are _not_ beginners. Time is money and
> > taking a lot of time to configure an application is wasteful, when an equal
> > result can be achieved in much less time with Pin
On Tue, Dec 19, 2000 at 12:42:19PM -0800, Dwight Johnson wrote:
> Only in one respect, that I can see based on my brief exposure, is mutt
> better -- mutt is a better _threaded_ mail reader. It looks like a lot of
> effort has been put into mutt's threading features. People who want a
> threaded ma
Quoting Dwight Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> These issues concern people who are _not_ beginners. Time is money and
> taking a lot of time to configure an application is wasteful, when an equal
> result can be achieved in much less time with Pine.
As I said, if you're used to pine, just use the
> You can search the archives to find a link to the deb. There
> are licensing issues with pine so Debian doesn't include it but
> there are people who have built the debs. I just snagged the
> latest stable release (source) from the pine web site. I had to
> insta
On Mon, 18 Dec 2000, David Wright wrote:
> Quoting Dwight Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, ktb wrote:
> >
> > > You might want to try mutt. I like it a lot better. It
> > > took some configuring but it isn't as clunky as pine.
> >
> > I have recently been trying mutt a
Quoting Dwight Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, ktb wrote:
>
> > You might want to try mutt. I like it a lot better. It
> > took some configuring but it isn't as clunky as pine.
>
> I have recently been trying mutt and, quite honestly, I have find mutt a
> lot clunkier
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Xucaen wrote:
> Hi all... curious.. I'm trying to install pine
> via apt-get but it tells me package found but
> can't be installed.. I don't have the exact
> error message (it was late. ;-).
> has anyone else been able to install pine?
Yes. Install pine4-diffs and everythi
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 01:12:27PM -0800, Dwight Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, ktb wrote:
>
> > You might want to try mutt. I like it a lot better. It
> > took some configuring but it isn't as clunky as pine.
>
> I have recently been trying mutt and, quite honestly, I have find mu
Dwight Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> So I am very surprised to hear you say that you think Pine is clunkier than
> mutt. I would welcome learning in what ways.
I cut my teeth on Pine and Pico. About a year ago, I started playing with
mutt, and was quickly frustrated by the appearant comple
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, ktb wrote:
> You might want to try mutt. I like it a lot better. It
> took some configuring but it isn't as clunky as pine.
I have recently been trying mutt and, quite honestly, I have find mutt a
lot clunkier than Pine.
One example: when you call up Pine for the f
Xucaen wrote:
>
> Hi all... curious.. I'm trying to install pine
> via apt-get but it tells me package found but
> can't be installed.. I don't have the exact
> error message (it was late. ;-).
> has anyone else been able to install pine?
yes i downloaded the 3rd party pine packages a while bac
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 09:55:42AM -0800, Xucaen wrote:
> Hi all... curious.. I'm trying to install pine
> via apt-get but it tells me package found but
> can't be installed.. I don't have the exact
> error message (it was late. ;-).
> has anyone else been able to install pine?
>
You ca
On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, Daniel Mashao wrote:
> Anybody installed this package from project/experimental?
>
> I replaced -ltermcap with -lncurses as suggested elsewhere but still I
> cannot compile the package becuase it is looking for a crypt() function.
Once more I have to say: Please, do not mod
18 matches
Mail list logo
