Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!sunybcs!trotter!bill
From: bill@trotter.usma.edu (Bill Gunshannon)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: Mush vs. Elm vs. MH vs. ...
Message-ID: <926@trotter.usma.edu>
Date: Fri, 25-Sep-87 09:09:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: trotter.926
Posted: Fri Sep 25 09:09:01 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 26-Sep-87 20:15:50 EDT
References: <905@bdmrrr.bdm.com>
Organization: US Military Academy, West Point, NY
Lines: 24
Keywords: Which is best?
Xref: mnetor comp.mail.misc:551 comp.sources.d:1292

In article <905@bdmrrr.bdm.com>, shprentz@bdmrrr.bdm.com (Joel Shprentz) writes:
> Can anyone comment on how Mush, the mail user's shell just posted to 
> comp.sources.unix, compares with Elm or MH?
> 

I can't comment on MUSH yet because I am missing parts 7-12 but I can tell
you that although ELM works fine on the 3B2 that I am writting this on it
does have some problems.  I have been trying for some months now to get it
run on an INTEL 310 without success.  Don't get me wrong, it isn't ELM's 
fault, the compiler on the INTEL is a disaster.  It is also inconsistent.
It has some of the system calls for SYSV and some for V7. Makes for some
interesting programming.

MH is a new one to me but if someone can send me the sources I would be 
willing to give it a try too.  Almost anything is better than vanilla mail.

bill gunshannon


UUCP: {philabs}\		 	US SNAIL: Martin Marietta Data Systems 
      {phri   } >!trotter.usma.edu!bill           USMA, Bldg 600, Room 26 
      {sunybcs}/			          West Point, NY  10996	     
RADIO:         KB3YV		        PHONE: WORK    (914)446-7747
AX.25:         KB3YV @ K3RLI	        PHONE: HOME    (914)565-5256