Re: LloydsTSB
In message 1255478230.32582.203.ca...@duiker John-Mark Bell j...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 19:54 +0100, Geoffrey Baxendale wrote: In message 1255458566.32582.200.ca...@duiker John-Mark Bell j...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 19:17 +0100, Geoffrey Baxendale wrote: Hi, LloydsTSB has recently stopped working for me after years of trouble free operation. I don't think it's Netsurf as V2.1 doesn't work either. I suspect they have loaded their site with Javascript or it's a Browser detection problem. Having said that Organo2 works OK. Try: https://online.lloydstsb.co.uk/account.ibc or try loging on from the home page. It really is NetSurf. Please see https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=2872051group_id=51719atid=464312 Thanks John, that at least rules out finger trouble at this end, but why does it not work with V2.1 if it is due to a recent change in Netsurf? It isn't due to a recent change in NetSurf. NetSurf's cookie handling hasn't changed for ages. I suspect that the LloydsTSB site has tightened up its cookie handling. That makes sense John, thank you the explanation. I thought it had to be a change at their end, but didn't realise Netsurfs cookie handling was iffy. However, the fact remains that NetSurf's cookie handling in this particular case is wrong and needs to be fixed. My comment on the above linked bug report tells you how to work around the issue for the timebeing. Sorry, I hadn't spotted your comment, I'll give that a try. John. TTFN -- Geoff. Using Acorn StrongARM Kinetic RiscPC. Oxymoron of the day: Advanced BASIC
Re: LloydsTSB
On 13 Oct, Geoffrey Baxendale thebe...@sarno.freeserve.co.uk wrote: LloydsTSB has recently stopped working for me after years of trouble free operation. I thought I was the only one! After much telephoning, I found out that nothing has changed at the LloydsTSB website end, so in the end found the solution was to delete the entire cookies file. Either it is a tightening-up by them, or something duff with the cookie. Anyway, starting afresh, all is back to normal for me :o) John -- /____ /Mail fromm...@johnwoodhouse.plus.com . . . using RISC OS 5.13 on an XScale powered Iyonix computer.
(housekeeping) private copies vs list
please, if sending a private copy to somebody while posting to the list, put the list in the TO field and the private copy in CC or BCC? then people's filtering systems will be happy. -- Jim Nagelwww.archivemag.co.uk
Re: (housekeeping) private copies vs list
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:32:00 +0100 Jim Nagel nets...@abbeypress.co.uk wrote: please, if sending a private copy to somebody while posting to the list, put the list in the TO field and the private copy in CC or BCC? then people's filtering systems will be happy. You mean you don't filter based on To or CC as well as List-Id? :) B.
LloydsTSB
Interesting stuff... Yesterday Fay's NetSurf worked okay with LTSB, today it presented the known message. NetSurf on this machine is still loggin on to LTSB okay as is the version installed on VRPC Adjust-SA on the XP box next to me. BTW. On this machine I have a number of .co.uk cookies. Cleared out her Cookies and now LTSB is okay on her machine. Strange business... Dave -- Dave Triffid
Re: (housekeeping) private copies vs list
On Wed, October 14, 2009 6:01 pm, Rob Kendrick wrote: On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:32:00 +0100 Jim Nagel nets...@abbeypress.co.uk wrote: please, if sending a private copy to somebody while posting to the list, put the list in the TO field and the private copy in CC or BCC? then people's filtering systems will be happy. You mean you don't filter based on To or CC as well as List-Id? :) B. Perhaps you meant to say 'Oh, are you not able, because you are using a restricted client, to filter on To or CC as well as List-Id? :) Please be so kind as to set 'Reply To:netsurf-users@netsurf-browser.org' or other as appropriate :^) -- Regards from Dave Lawton HTML emails are dangerous, and 10 times larger than plain text. Did you know that HTML email just helps the phishers ? 01302 337559 Fax 01302 337564
Re: (housekeeping) private copies vs list
On 14 Oct 2009 Rob Kendrick r...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:32:00 +0100 Jim Nagel nets...@abbeypress.co.uk wrote: please, if sending a private copy to somebody while posting to the list, put the list in the TO field and the private copy in CC or BCC? then people's filtering systems will be happy. You mean you don't filter based on To or CC as well as List-Id? :) Or return-path? With best wishes, Peter. -- Peter, \ / zfc Yb \ Prestbury, Cheltenham, Glos. GL52 Anne\/ ____\ England. and / / \ | | |\ | / _\ http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk family / \__/ \_/ | \| \__/ \__ pnyo...@ormail.co.uk
Re: (housekeeping) private copies vs list
Rob Kendrick wrote on 14 Oct: On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:32:00 +0100 Jim Nagel nets...@abbeypress.co.uk wrote: please, if sending a private copy to somebody while posting to the list, put the list in the TO field and the private copy in CC or BCC? then people's filtering systems will be happy. You mean you don't filter based on To or CC as well as List-Id? :) exactly. of course i could filter on all those fields. but then when somebody sends ME a personal copy the filter would send it to the general list folder where it would not get the priority attention the sender intends. -- Jim Nagelwww.archivemag.co.uk
spectacular crash on trying to print
using Netsurf r9629 i had two pages open: a long Drobe article and a longish Wikipedia article. tried to print the Wikipedia one (!Printers+ 1.91a), specifying stop at end of web page. Netsurf crashes (but, unusually?, the Wikipedia window stays open), then Wimp crashes, then Edit, then Pinboard, ... nothing for it but Ctrl-break. logfile: www.bnagel.net/dad/netsurflog091014.zip (1.7M) -- Jim Nagelwww.archivemag.co.uk
Re: (housekeeping) private copies vs list
Jim Nagel nets...@abbeypress.co.uk wrote: Rob Kendrick wrote on 14 Oct: You mean you don't filter based on To or CC as well as List-Id? :) exactly. of course i could filter on all those fields. but then when somebody sends ME a personal copy the filter would send it to the general list folder where it would not get the priority attention the sender intends. In that situation, you would get two copies: the one via the list would end up filtered on the List-Id field as intended, and the personal copy woild end up in your inbox. It's always worked fine here (I *only* filter on List-Id or its equivalent, where possible). -- Steve Fryatt - Leeds, England http://www.stevefryatt.org.uk/
Re: (housekeeping) private copies vs list
Steve Fryatt wrote on 14 Oct : Jim Nagel nets...@abbeypress.co.uk wrote: Rob Kendrick wrote on 14 Oct: You mean you don't filter based on To or CC as well as List-Id? :) exactly. of course i could filter on all those fields. but then when somebody sends ME a personal copy the filter would send it to the general list folder where it would not get the priority attention the sender intends. In that situation, you would get two copies: the one via the list would end up filtered on the List-Id field as intended, and the personal copy woild end up in your inbox. It's always worked fine here (I *only* filter on List-Id or its equivalent, where possible). i've been filtering on To = *Netsurf-users* ; have now changed To to List-ID sending myself a personal copy to myself (rather than cc) to see if your suggestion works. -- Jim Nagelwww.archivemag.co.uk
