Re: [Nmh-workers] Artificial argv limits.

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi,

David Levine wrote:
> Paul F. wrote:
> > (one way to reduce the likelihood of this, and of the original
> > overflow issue, might be to pass the message arguments to rmmproc in
> > the same form that they were received by refile.  currently "refile
> > all" causes a call to rmmproc with a full enumeration of message
> > numbers.  if "refile all" instead caused "rmmproc all", on the
> > assumption that the same expansion would result, then the original
> > invocation of refile would be as likely to fail as rmmproc.  there
> > are probably subtleties to this i'm not getting right now.)
> 
> I think this should work.  rmmproc could call "pick <args>" to get the
> same expansion.

It seems a bad idea to me.  It's just punting the expansion problem
further downstream.  A plain `pick <args>' would take my ~/.mh_profile
into account and my `lp', last picked, sequence would get trampled.
rmmproc's task is to deal with the files, that should be its interface.

Cheers, Ralph.