On Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:54:04 EDT, "J. W. Ballantine" <jwb@homer.att.com>  said:
> First, when I try and run exmh with wish from tk8.4.0 it seems to take
> forever to start, but with wish from tk8.a.4 it starts in a snap.
This sounds like something piggy in the 'flist' code - I'm seeing flist
in general taking 5-10 seconds.  Interesting that a different wish comes up
fast, there might be a borkedness in 8.4.
> Using the latest CVS, when I open exmh and the folder I'm in has unseen
> messages and I hit next, exmh changes to the next folder with unseen messages
> rather than to the first unseen in the current folder.
Hmm.. weirdness..
> Finally, when I reach the end of the messages in a folder and go on to
> the next unseen, exmh always goes back to inbox (which has no unseen
> messages) rather than the next folder with unseen messages.  (When I
> goto next from inbox it does go where I would think it should go).
I've been seeing this as well - *usually* with inbox, but it's gotten
stuck on some other folders as well (I have procmail do rcvstore into folders
for me).
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech

from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6403D16F16
	for <jm@localhost>; Thu,  3 Oct 2002 12:22:08 +0100 (IST)
from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 03 Oct 2002 12:22:08 +0100 (IST)
from listman.example.com (listman.example.com [66.187.233.211]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g92N1VK00712 for
    <jm-exmh@jmason.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 00:01:32 +0100
from listman.example.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by
    listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 870D83EBE8; Wed,  2 Oct 2002
    19:02:03 -0400 (EDT)
from int-mx1.corp.example.com (int-mx1.corp.example.com
    [172.16.52.254]) by listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EC323ECDA
    for <exmh-workers@listman.redhat.com>; Wed,  2 Oct 2002 19:01:00 -0400
    (EDT)
(from mail@localhost) by int-mx1.corp.example.com (8.11.6/8.11.6)
    id g92N10M15340 for exmh-workers@listman.redhat.com; Wed, 2 Oct 2002
    19:01:00 -0400
from mx1.example.com (mx1.example.com [172.16.48.31]) by
    int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g92N10f15334 for
    <exmh-workers@redhat.com>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 19:01:00 -0400
from dimebox.bmc.com (adsl-66-140-152-233.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net
    [66.140.152.233]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id
    g92Mg5i19652 for <exmh-workers@redhat.com>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 18:42:05 -0400
by dimebox.bmc.com (Postfix, from userid 1205) id 126E937EBF;
    Wed,  2 Oct 2002 18:00:58 -0500 (CDT)
from dimebox.bmc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dimebox.bmc.com
    (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD8637EBE for <exmh-workers@redhat.com>;
    Wed,  2 Oct 2002 18:00:58 -0500 (CDT)
In-reply-to Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> message dated "Tue,
    01 Oct 2002 14:14:57 +0700."
No, hits=-19.9 required=5.0
	tests=AWL,IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,REFERENCES,X_LOOP
	version=2.50-cvs
From exmh-workers-admin@redhat.com  Thu Oct  3 12:22:09 2002