Hello, On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 11:29:00AM -0500, Tim Chase wrote: > pine is to pico/nano as mutt is to vi/vim/emacs I use to combine Mutt with Nano, and now with Joe, since I found Joe being a very easy/useful and powerfull enough editor. > Pine (and pico/nano) is/are easy to approach for the uninitiated, > and get the basics done and a small handful of more advanced > features. Idem for Mutt+Nano/Mutt+Joe. > Mutt (and vi/vim/emacs) has/have a much steeper learning curve, > but also afford far more power to the user that's willing to > invest the time to learn them. They also allow for far more > customization to your own whims, allowing you to do > crazy-powerful things. To further the analogy, I'd compare Mutt > to vi/vim, and Thunderbird to XEmacs...vi/vim/mutt are svelte but > a bit obscure while Thunderbird and XEmacs hog more resources and > are a bit more approachable for the newbie. Maybe you can Google with keywords like "example+.muttrc" or ".muttrc+template": IMHO the problem of Mutt is that it isn't configurable by a Menu function as under Pine; but its easy when you find some good tempalte to refer to. (Note: for the editor you can set it inside .muttrc by adding: set editor=joe to ~/.muttrc that's all) > I haven't yet made the jump to Mutt, but not for want to learn > it. I have both on my Debian systems: Mutt is by default, Pine does also exist as .deb package here: http://ftp2.de.freebsd.org/pub/linux/pine I mostly use Mutt for mail, Pine only for nntp. Both are interesting and blindfriendly applications. Aldo. _______________________________________________ Blinux-list mailing list Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list