I wittered:
> but from a brief eyeball it looks like the problem is that I have a
> record without a name field - which surely is legal, isn't it?
Lucky guess. I've just tried a quick experiment, moving my .bbdb out
of the way and replacing it with a simple one. I do indeed get the
same error for the following database (where the first record has no
name field):
???
net: foo@baz
bar
net: bar@baz
Furthermore, it works fine (finding no duplicates) if I add a name
field to the record, and when I add another record with a
duplicate name, as follows
baz
net: baz@baz, foo@baz
it succeeds in finding the duplication.
However, this doesn't seem to be the whole story, as I still get
exactly the same error once I've reinstated my real .bbdb file and
named or removed all the anonymous entries in it (and yes, I did
restart everything just to make sure it wasn't a bbdb cache problem).
Any more ideas?
Patrick
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info
BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
