[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?
From: |
valdis . kletnieks |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work? |
Date: |
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 21:08:31 -0500 |
On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 00:19:31 +0000, Ralph Corderoy said:
> That quickly bores. -noprint doesn't seem a good fit for a general
> `please be quiet'. If folder's regaining that functionality then
> perhaps it's the opportunity to use a more general, positive rather than
> negative, option? Especially if it has an often unambiguous
> abbreviation.
-silent?
pgpUEmgaR9_lZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, Paul Fox, 2018/01/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, David Levine, 2018/01/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, Paul Fox, 2018/01/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, David Levine, 2018/01/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, Ralph Corderoy, 2018/01/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?,
valdis . kletnieks <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, Paul Fox, 2018/01/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, Ralph Corderoy, 2018/01/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, Paul Fox, 2018/01/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, Ralph Corderoy, 2018/01/07
- Re: [Nmh-workers] does "folder +inbox -noprint" work?, Paul Fox, 2018/01/09