[Techtalk] mutt config issue: copying instead of moving messages

[Rasjid Wilcox]

On Tuesday 17 August 2004 09:27, Riccarda Cassini wrote:
> Finally, I started to
> poke around in the source code... and even found out what to patch.
> All on my own (!) -  which I must say I'm just a teeny-weeny little bit
> proud of :-)

Well done indeed!

> So now, when I do ";C+mbox" it automatically untags the messages, as
> desired.  The only problem with this solution is that I'll have to
> patch mutt again every time I upgrade to a new version -- but well...
>
> Just in case anyone should perceive the same need as I did, I'd of
> course be happy to share further instructions - though, if you want a
> proper patch (you know, that thing that people send in when they say
> they're "submitting a patch"), you'll have to tell me how to create
> it... my local guru just went on vacation ;-)

<soapbox>

If it improves the program I believe that it is always worth sending the patch 
to the program maintainers.  This is the whole point of open-source, and why 
it works.  It is also one way of saying 'thanks' for all this free/libre 
software.

A little patch may not seem like much, but 'every little bit counts'.

</soapbox>

You want to do either context sensitive diffs

$ diff -cr old new > patch

OR unified diffs

$ diff -ur old new > patch

Some projects prefer one style of diff over the other.  If in doubt, you can 
always ask the maintainers what they prefer.  Unified diffs are smaller, but 
context diffs show both old and new code more cleanly.  Python, for example, 
stongly prefers context diffs, but most patches I've seen posted to mailing 
lists are unified diffs.

And even if you don't submit the patch, having it around as a real patch file 
makes it easier to apply it to the next upgrade.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

Rasjid.

-- 
Rasjid Wilcox
Canberra, Australia (UTC +10 hrs)
http://www.openminddev.net