Re[2]: The Bat! 3.51.10 is now available
Hello all, Tuesday, July 26, 2005, Wayne Howard wrote: Yes. You told something about Servant Salamander. V That is a good software... It seems terribly basic to me. old free 1.52 is very basic, but small and stable. Current 2.5 beta is very great, but I hate their releasing scheme, who wants to wait more than 2 years for next final? -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 3.51.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Notebook Acer, Pentium4-M 2.2 GHz, 512 MB RAM, ADSL line Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
OT: The Bat! 3.51.10 is now available
Hallo Marek, On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:02:24 +0200GMT (26-7-2005, 9:02 +0200, where I live), you wrote: Yes. You told something about Servant Salamander. V That is a good software... It seems terribly basic to me. MM old free 1.52 is very basic, but small and stable. Current 2.5 beta is moderator Note: This moderator's interjection is a note to all readers and not just to the person being replied to, even if their post may have instigated this reply. Please don't feel singled out Marek. ' This thread is moving into the Off-Topic realm. Please continue this on TBOT (this message has been CC'd to the TBOT list to maintain threading.) You can subscribe to TBOT by sending a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To find out why these MOD messages are posted to the list instead of private mail, please read the welcome message you received when you subscribed. Thank you. /moderator -- Groetjes, Roelof If moderators don't need one, then neither do I! pgpQK2SSKhKIg.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
CANNOT Repair My IMAP Database (Was: Re: How Do I Repair My IMAP database?)
Hi, everyone. On Tuesday, June 28, 2005, 11:29:37 PM, I wrote: I'm still on version 3.0.9.13. One reason that I have never upgraded this version and completely stopped using The Bat! some time ago is that it is unusable due to a constantly recurring error message. No matter which account I'm working in, one IMAP account continues to generate the following error: An error occurred while reading the message base ...\Fastmail (IMAP)\55DBCDFF.TBB. Do you want to repair the message base now? I have tried clicking Yes and repairing the file, but it doesn't help. Every few seconds, this message pops up, making it impossible to work. Can someone tell me the best way to deal with this? Since this is IMAP, can I just delete the TBB file and let TB rebuild it? At the time, I received several helpful replies. At one point, I thought I had the problem solved, but was never brave enough to upgrade until installing 3.51.10 today. As soon as I started up the new version, I started getting the error popups (this time for 0588F103.TBB). As before, I was asked whether I wanted to repair the message base, but whether I pressed Yes or No, the error message would immediately pop up again. I was able to eventually get to the repair dialog, but of course, there was no way to tell which real folder 0588F103.TBB belonged to. I selected the account name and ran the repair for all folders in the account. Just as on previous betas, it found problems with over 20 folders and claimed to have recovered several thousand messages. However, for Inbox, it said Folder is not repaired: Could not write rebuilt data. For all other folders, it said Messages recovered: x, damaged parts (part???.bin) saved:0. (Anybody know what this means?) All the time the repair was running, and after it completed, I had two popup errors present--no matter how many times I tried to dismiss them, they kept coming back. I ran the repair two more times (a lengthy process), with over 20 folders repaired each time, and the popups continued. No way could I get to a menu to disconnect from the server, nor could I repair the database. The next challenge was to close the program. After literally hundreds of clicks in the error dialogs, on the close buttons, and on confirmation dialogs, I finally got it to close. Eventually, I used Explorer to delete the TBB and TBI files from the Inbox folder, and that did seem to fix the problem. I am reporting this again because, although I may be the only one to have experienced this, someone else will certainly encounter it, and it could very well be a novice user (this is a released version) who has no clue what to do. Someone suggested in a followup in this thread back in June that the error message be changed to be more helpful. Not only that, but I think it is critical that there be some way to dismiss the error message without it continuing to pop up eternally. (And now to see if I can actually post this followup using TB!) Postscript: The answer is no, I wasn't able to post using TB. (I'm using Thunderbird again.) Worse yet, immediately after the send failed, I started to get the same error all over again, and again for the same file--which I had deleted earlier and supposedly had been rebuilt! (I guess it's possible that the file wasn't related to Inbox, and I hadn't deleted it. If that's the case, though, why did things work for a while with no errors? And if not, how do I find out which folder 0588F103.TBB does belong to? I asked this question last month, but didn't get an answer.) This time, I was somehow able to disconnect from the server before I started the repair. It didn't help, though; once the repair started, the error continued to pop up--over and over and over As I sent this message the first time (I thought), I was about to post regarding a couple of other problems I was having. Guess they'll have to wait until (if?) I'm able to get this one resolved. :-( -- Keith Russell ...Give instruction to a wise man and he will be yet wiser. Using The Bat! 3.51.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 on a 2.4 GHZ Pentium IV with 512 MB. Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: CANNOT Repair My IMAP Database (Was: Re: How Do I Repair My IMAP database?)
Well, after I posted a few minutes ago, I started up The Bat! again, and this time, quickly switched away from Inbox to a different folder as soon as possible. I navigated around to several folders before going back to Inbox. It's now been several minutes, and no error messages. So what makes the difference??? I'm baffled -- Keith Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Re[2]: last betas and regexp doesn't work right with special characters!
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 04:38:16 +0200, Vili [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Subpatt 1 should match on Schönen guten Tag, but it only finds Sch and this is very annoying :-( Still broken in .10 ... 2. send the bug in private to 9Val with high priority My first mail because of this bug was in CC to 9val. Result: We got a release with broken regex. OK, this is surely not because of 9val, but he is also a co-worker of this company and should have to say something before they make a release. But it seems that it isn't so and we get new versions when it looks nice and not when it is usefull and advisable. :-/ We could remember about a not finished 2.xx and from one day to another we got a V3 for which a lot of people should buy again :-( -- Bye, Bernd Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Re[8]: The Bat! 3.51.10 is now available
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 04:40:05 +0200, Vili [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Yes. You told something about Servant Salamander. That is a good software... I never contradicted this :-) -- Bye, Bernd Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Mod: DEAD HORSE (was: The Bat! 3.51.10 is now available)
Hallo Bernd, On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:53:26 +0200GMT (26-7-2005, 10:53 +0200, where I live), you wrote: Yes. You told something about Servant Salamander. That is a good software... BD I never contradicted this BD moderator Note: This moderator's interjection is a note to all readers and not just to the person being replied to, even if their post may have instigated this reply. Please don't feel singled out Bernd. ' This topic has gone way off / too long / too heated and I am forced to pronounce it dead in fairness to the purpose and other members of the list. Please take it off-list or to TBOT. For anyone unfamiliar with Dead Horse policy, DEAD means DEAD. NO REPLIES to the list, only off-list or on TBOT. To find out why these MOD messages are posted to the list instead of private mail, please read the welcome message you received when you subscribed. Thank you. /moderator -- Groetjes, Roelof Decrease moderator unemployment: Post off-topic messages pgpX1sBIHBZuk.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release and IMAP
On Monday, July 25, 2005 at 10:20:22 PM [GMT -0500], Gary wrote: that is a good idea for the outbox.. I just hope that in time, I will achieve smooth IMAP operation. I can't explain it, but it does happen on both my Unix (FreeBSD) and Windows servers. Also, combine this with the fact that all other clients work perfectly when used... even Outlook (for testing), as well as Mutt, Pine, Mulberry, OE, and several others I have tried over time. /sigh/ TB! IMAP has never worked well while browsing a mailbox that is busily receiving new mail. As new mail comes in, it often interferes with the loading of messages etc. You're one of the few who filters the majority of your mail *after* reading it. At the same time your receive a lot of mail daily. So the Inbox is very busy. I read all my mail after it's filtered. So incoming mail is spread across folders. One folder is rarely busy enough to create issues. So I end up not having issues with basic loading most of the time now. I can use TB! and appreciate the other IMAP improvements that have occurred. IMAP is indeed miles ahead, even though they may not yet have properly fixed your particular issue. Additionally, I suspect that with that fixed, many other minor hitches will disappear with it. -- -= Curtis =- The Bat! v3.51.10 System Specs: http://specs.aimlink.name -=-=- If all goes well, you've overlooked something! Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: CANNOT Repair My IMAP Database (Was: Re: How Do I Repair My IMAP database?)
On Tuesday, July 26, 2005 at 2:45:10 AM [GMT -0500], Keith Russell wrote: Firstly, I'm a FastMail user and can confirm that TB! can work well with it. So your problems with it should be reproducible by me if there were problems with FastMail. As soon as I started up the new version, I started getting the error popups (this time for 0588F103.TBB). As before, I was asked whether I wanted to repair the message base, but whether I pressed Yes or No, the error message would immediately pop up again. I was able to eventually get to the repair dialog, but of course, there was no way to tell which real folder 0588F103.TBB belonged to. I selected the account name and ran the repair for all folders in the account. Eventually, I used Explorer to delete the TBB and TBI files from the Inbox folder, and that did seem to fix the problem. You could open the properties of one of the problem folders and delete the cache. When TB! caches your mail locally, it creates a tbi (index file for message list) and a tbb file (an actual message base). Hitting the delete cache button deletes those two files. I am reporting this again because, although I may be the only one to have experienced this, someone else will certainly encounter it, and it could very well be a novice user (this is a released version) who has no clue what to do. Your problem is odd indeed and despite all of TB!'s problems with IMAP, I'm finding it difficult to think the problem is with TB!. For some reason, your cache files are being corrupted. The fact that ThunderBird is OK doesn't necessarily mean that your machine is OK or that some other application is interfering with TB!. I don't know how willing you are to go down that road of trouble shooting. Someone suggested in a followup in this thrad back in June that the error message be changed to be more helpful. Not only that, but I think it is critical that there be some way to dismiss the error message without it continuing to pop up eternally. Why suppress errors that really shouldn't be triggered? I can't recall the last time I've seen one of those errors. When I did see one, it would pop up once. I delete the cache and it would go away. However, those days are long gone. I'm actually pleased with the cache integrity now. I haven't deleted a TB! cache file in quite a while. I can't recall the last time actually. (And now to see if I can actually post this followup using TB!) Postscript: The answer is no, I wasn't able to post using TB. (I'm using Thunderbird again.) Worse yet, immediately after the send failed, I started to get the same error all over again, and again for the same file--which I had deleted earlier and supposedly had been rebuilt! This is really strange and further makes me wonder what's really happening to your cache files. I'd start thinking more of the system in general and not just TB!. ThunderBird manages, but TB! isn't managing. What's your system like? Hardware description (processor and ram, hard disk space) OS? Version? Antivirus software running and is it proxying your IMAP connection? Any other scanners running that may be scanning cache files as they're written? How is your machine otherwise? All other apps running well? -- -= Curtis =- The Bat! v3.51.10 System Specs: http://specs.aimlink.name -=-=- If it jams, force it. If it breaks, it needed replacing Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
On Monday, July 25, 2005 at 5:12:51 PM [GMT -0500], Alexander S. Kunz wrote: Offering all three versions maybe would show the commitment to stability, while not sacrificing the benefit of the progress that has been made in the meantime. I tend to agree, especially as an IMAP user. IMO, 3.5.10 is OK for release, especially when considering the version that was released prior to it. v3.5.10 is better. Not perfect, but distinctly better. Once it's better than what was there, it's a worthy replacement. Separate from this basic decision, is TB!'s development. It's occurring in a way that has TB! is perpetual fix mode. The developers have said over and over again that they don't work well just bug-fixing alone. As a result, throughout TB!'s development, new features have been added while trying to fully develop and debug other features. So new bugs are created as old bugs are being fixed. The complexity of TB! often leads to new bugs appearing while fixing or enhancing old features. With the current development approach, releases will always have easily found bugs. I really can't recall a release that has not. It's a matter of whether or not there are existing show-stoppers that make the build not worthy of release. ATM, there seem to be none. I'm saying this more as an observation, rather than a criticism. From an IMAP standpoint, v3.51.10 is better than 3.50.33, and IMAP is big! There have been many other fixes since then. Of course, there have been new bugs created that have also been fixed. However, the overall effect seems positive. With new releases come new features and possible new problems for users. Making earlier versions available for download, is therefore always a good thing. However, don't deny *all* users what would amount to a better build for most of them. -- -= Curtis =- The Bat! v3.51.10 System Specs: http://specs.aimlink.name -=-=- Help stamp out mental illness, or I'll kill you! Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
Hello Keith, Monday, July 25, 2005, 4:18:34, you wrote: The file thebat_pro_3-51.msi is not a valid installation package. Ideas? Do I need to uninstall the old version before installing this? Or what? Maybe the download got corrupted? Did you try to check the digital signature of the file? -- Best regards, Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
On 2005-07-26 at 03:18:34 Keith Russell wrote: I am installing over a very old beta version (didn't write down the beta version and now I can't run the program). Before starting the installation I renamed the installation folder from TheBat to The Bat! (Finally graduated from DOS and I'm converting all my file and folder names to use spaces. :-)) NEVER rename or move directories that have been installed by MSI. It's guaranteed to give you grief. :) Rename the directory back, uninstall via the Add/Remove control panel, and install The Bat 3.51.10 from scratch. (Of course after BACKING UP EVERYTHING.) If the uninstall doesn't work, you'll have to use the infamous MSI cleaner from Microsoft. The feature you are trying to use is on a network resource that is unavailable. Click OK to try again, or enter an alternate path to a folder containing the installation folder thebat_professional.msi. Interestingly, the pathname it was trying to install from was the path an old version on a logical drive that doesn't even exist on my system any more! You should never move or rename any drives, as long as you have MSI software installed. :) MSI simply can't handle this. You could cheat MSI by putting back the original .msi file you installed in the original location. I browsed to the correct location for the installation file-- which, of course, is not named thebat_professional.msi, but rather thebat_pro_3-51.msi--and continued. I then got this message: The file thebat_pro_3-51.msi is not a valid installation package. This means that thebat_pro_3-51.msi is not the original .msi file that you installed your old The Bat with. You need a copy of that to complete the uninstall. It's a completely braindead system, I agree, but that's just the way MSI works... pgpjo5XQKUZvg.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
7/26/2005 9:49 AM Hi Dimitry, On 7/26/2005 Dimitry Andric wrote: DA This means that thebat_pro_3-51.msi is not the original .msi file DA that you installed your old The Bat with. You need a copy of that to DA complete the uninstall. It's a completely braindead system, I agree, DA but that's just the way MSI works... So why does RIT Labs insist on using it?? Why perpetuate such utter nonsense? Sooner or later _somebody_ must take a stand for what is good and works well. The stuff I develop and distribute uses an *.exe and it works! -- Take Care, Paul The Bat! v.3.0.2.10 on Win2k SP4-Rollup1 5.0.2195 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
On 2005-07-26 at 15:53:32 Paul Van Noord wrote: complete the uninstall. It's a completely braindead system, I agree, but that's just the way MSI works... So why does RIT Labs insist on using it?? There could be several reasons: - Microsoft Windows Logo compliance, though not sure if they'll need it :) - Automated software rollouts for corporate environments - Ability to shove the blame onto Microsoft ;) pgpURIIz27zdu.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Hello 9Val, On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 22:12:31 +0300 GMT (26/07/2005, 02:12 +0700 GMT), 9Val wrote: 9 I know, that there are a lot of complaints about 3.51 beta serie. 9 Now I'll describe some reasons why we release it. Your explanation is highly appreciated. I see some minor glitches in this version, and my favourite is that I cannot assign keyboard shortcuts to character sets in the viewer. This kind of stuff is certainly no reason to hold back a release. 3.51.10 runs vary stable on my system, and I would approve of a release if you asked me. Probably that doesn't make any difference: You don't need our approval. NB: I don't use IMAP, so I cannot comment on any bell curves. -- Cheers, Thomas. Next Sunday a special collection will be taken to defray the cost of the new carpet. All those wishing to do something on the new carpet will come forward and do so. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.51.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Hello Thomas Fernandez everyone else, on 26-Jul-2005 at 16:53 you (Thomas Fernandez) wrote: 3.51.10 runs vary stable ^ LOL!!! typo of the month! -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) The doors of Heaven and Hell are adjacent and identical: both green, both beautiful. -- Nikos Kazantzakis Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Hello Boris, BA So none bug of BugList can be fixed without serious changes? Surely there are a lot of cosmetic fixes and traslation issues, but I don't think somebody will be satisfied with them more than three days. -- 9Val Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Hello Boris, BA I'm sure you said already something about numbering system but could you BA or somebody else please explain again (or send mid) how the new nubering BA system should be work? 3.51.10 3 = the major version number 51 = first cipher means feature list second cipher encodes stability/bugfix list 10 = public build revision, used for minor fixes and beta versions BA Oh, and if it really works that way: x.xx.x then I'm very disappoint BA and curious why you didn't chose x.xx.xx (and don't say that there are BA less zero's in Moldova). :) Is it so important to you? -- 9Val Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Hello Jay, JW But, personally, two things are of most interest to me in respect to 3.51: JWo Can I rely on MicroEd to not distort the text of my email messages? Yes JWo Will it give me an OTFE implementation that I can use (i.e. that JW will search my message base without hanging and also preserve my JW settings while migrating)? Actually I don't think problems with search reported in list are related to OTFE - it is problem of new search method and it is still not finished. Migration to OTFE will take all settings. -- 9Val Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
:) Is it so important to you? It's more an issue of convenience. If I've got the files for 3.51.1 3.51.9 and 3.51.10 then windoze organises them in the order 3.51.1 3.51.10 3.51.9 if you used the format x.xx.xx then windoze would list them in version number order. -- Stuart Hemming Using The Bat! v3.51.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Aided by BayesIt! 0.8.1, MyGate v1.0, rss2pop3 v1.2, SpamPal v1.70, MyMacros 1.11a. The Benefits of Being Over Sixty ( 8) : You enjoy hearing about other people's operations. pgp9jTpwO5QPd.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Hello Alexander, On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:19:52 +0200 GMT (26/07/2005, 22:19 +0700 GMT), Alexander S. Kunz wrote: 3.51.10 runs vary stable ASK ^ ASK LOL!!! ASK typo of the month! I do expect a plaque for that. ;-) -- Cheers, Thomas. Heut debug ich, morgen brows ich, uebermorgen cast ich die Koenigin auf int. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.51.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
On 7/26/05, 9Val [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 3.51.10 3 = the major version number 51 = first cipher means feature list second cipher encodes stability/bugfix list 10 = public build revision, used for minor fixes and beta versions 9Val, if I understand this correctly, then we are currently testing the following number 5 feature list: - IMAP - Unicode support - HTML editor improvements - Customization If this be so, when do you suppose RL will look into the issue involving the search engine hanging - for me, at least, whenever I try to implement OTFE? In other words, the same search in Non-OTFE runs fine; but after restoring from backup and trying to search the same directories (now under OTFE), the search takes forever. Also, if I understand correctly, RL has now basically discarded the policy that you introduced on June 24 when you gave the above roadmap. At that time, you said: We are taking course to not-fixed-date releases, which means no deadlines and no rush. Only approved by your responses versions will be named releases. But in this thread, you have clarified that policy as follows: This policy doesn't mean, that official release will be published only after beta-testers will approve it - it will take ages. We should balance on the edge between your approval and our needs. Now we can't wait more - 3 developers are staying and waiting for serious changes while all possible fixes are done, others will take weeks. As I see it, this clarification is so vague as to make the initial announcement virtually meaningless. But I always considered the policy to be impractical (as you might notice from my responses a month ago). So I don't feel any big loss here. The main question I have now is only how much value to give to your number 5 feature list - especially as I remain concerned about the search engine problem when moving from Non-OTFE to OTFE. And, last but not least, can RL give assurance that we can use 3.51.10 without worrying about the message content distortion and loss issues that were reported in the early releases of 3.51? -- jaywalker Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro (No OTFE) 3.5.36 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
On 7/26/05, 9Val [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Jay, JW But, personally, two things are of most interest to me in respect to 3.51: JWo Can I rely on MicroEd to not distort the text of my email messages? Yes Thank you, 9Val. Relying on your assurance, I will then install 3.51.10 and give it a try. JWo Will it give me an OTFE implementation that I can use (i.e. that JW will search my message base without hanging and also preserve my JW settings while migrating)? Actually I don't think problems with search reported in list are related to OTFE - it is problem of new search method and it is still not finished. The same search in Non-OTFE works fine, but in OTFE simply hangs. I suppose that could be due to the way the search engine is implemented. So when do you think this will be finished so that it becomes practical for people in my position to migrate to OTFE? Is this an issue that RL is working on? Migration to OTFE will take all settings. That's good to know. But if the Search Engine does not work for me in OTFE, it is just theoretical, because OTFE - even with all my settings - is still largely unusable without a search engine. -- jaywalker Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro (No OTFE) 3.5.36 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Stuart Hemming wrote: It's more an issue of convenience. If I've got the files for 3.51.1 3.51.9 and 3.51.10 then windoze organises them in the order 3.51.1 3.51.10 3.51.9 if you used the format x.xx.xx then windoze would list them in version number order. And then it will break again when/if you exceed 99. And again if you exceed 999. And so on. So this is not a a real fix, it's just a postponing. And, BTW, this happens with every product I have seen. -- ..hggdh.. Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
Hello Dimitry, On 2005-07-26 at 15:53:32 Paul Van Noord wrote: complete the uninstall. It's a completely braindead system, I agree, but that's just the way MSI works... So why does RIT Labs insist on using it?? There could be several reasons: - Microsoft Windows Logo compliance, though not sure if they'll need it :) It is the current standard. - Automated software rollouts for corporate environments Good point. - Ability to shove the blame onto Microsoft ;) You are cruel... -- Vili The Bat 3.51.10 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Szervizcsomag 1 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
Hi Keith! I browsed to the correct location for the installation file-- which, of course, is not named thebat_professional.msi, but rather thebat_pro_3-51.msi--and continued. I then got this message: The file thebat_pro_3-51.msi is not a valid installation package. Ideas? Do I need to uninstall the old version before installing this? Or what? You may try to deinstall the old version first, but I'm pretty sure that that won't help much. The problem is that you need the old inst package to deinstall as a custom action is called from it. The easied way to solve the problem would be to get the old package (that should be simple: Look up the version info in the support information and ask Max for the MSI package) and point to it when you get the error message. But maybe Stuart hint works, too. -- Regards, Raymund Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: About 3.51 release
Hello Stuart, Tuesday, July 26, 2005, 10:48:13 AM, you wrote: :) Is it so important to you? SH It's more an issue of convenience. If I've got the files for 3.51.1 SH 3.51.9 and 3.51.10 then windoze organises them in the order SH 3.51.1 SH 3.51.10 SH 3.51.9 Hmmm, here are two fixes: 1.) sort by date instead of file name. Then you even get them sorted correctly irregardless of the file being of the 'tbb.rar' type of the 'thebat_type_x-xx.msi' type. 2.) edit the file names so that they show up as you would like them. -- Best regards, MikeDmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.51.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Problem with MAPI Automatic Messages
Hi all, I am having a problem using TB against an Exchange 2003 server using MAPI. I have filed a bug report (https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4934) however I would be grateful if someone could confirm it so we can get it moved forward and resolved. This issue is currently preventing me using TB to run a mailing list. -- Warmest regards, Paul Created using TheBat! 3.5.30 on Windows XP Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
Thanks, everyone, for your replies. Sorry to be so slow to respond. I was actually able to complete the installation last night, but forgot to post to this thread with that information, and was busy this morning. In any case, the thread has turned out to be very educational. I will know in the future not to rename a directory involved in an msi installation At the same time, I'm glad I didn't have to repartition my hard drive just to install TB, as Dmitry's suggestion would have required! It was as simple as just clicking Cancel when the error dialog came up. Thanks, Stuart, for that suggestion. Now why didn't I think of that? -- Keith Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : KR Hi, all. KR Here I am again, ready for another try...and I can't get the KR program to install! KR I am installing over a very old beta version (didn't write down KR the beta version and now I can't run the program). Before KR starting the installation I renamed the installation folder from KR TheBat to The Bat! (Finally graduated from DOS and I'm KR converting all my file and folder names to use spaces. :-)) KR I think the existing version may have been installed from an msi KR (several months ago), and that might be related to the problem KR I'm having (but I'm not sure). KR I started the installation and was prompted to install to the KR TheBat folder. I corrected the location and continued. The KR program popped up a dialog saying: KR The feature you are trying to use is on a network resource that KR is unavailable. Click OK to try again, or enter an alternate path KR to a folder containing the installation folder KR thebat_professional.msi. Interestingly, the pathname it was KR trying to install from was the path an old version on a logical KR drive that doesn't even exist on my system any more! KR I browsed to the correct location for the installation file-- KR which, of course, is not named thebat_professional.msi, but KR rather thebat_pro_3-51.msi--and continued. I then got this message: KR The file thebat_pro_3-51.msi is not a valid installation package. KR Ideas? Do I need to uninstall the old version before installing KR this? Or what? KR Thanks for your help. Probably the .msi is corrupt. -- Best regards, Goncalo Farias Man is the only animal that blushes. Or needs to. Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
UUEncode not working?
Hi, I just tried to send a mail with uuencoded attachments but the source code of the message in the sent folder tells me that the mail is still base64 encoded. Can someone confirm? -- Regards, Raymund Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Hello Jay, JW If this be so, when do you suppose RL will look into the issue JW involving the search engine hanging - for me, at least, whenever I try JW to implement OTFE? In other words, the same search in Non-OTFE runs JW fine; but after restoring from backup and trying to search the same JW directories (now under OTFE), the search takes forever. Next beta serie. Slow and hanging search (even in non-OTFE mode) is one of the major objectives. JW As I see it, this clarification is so vague as to make the initial JW announcement virtually meaningless. But I always considered the policy JW to be impractical (as you might notice from my responses a month ago). Well, as I said before, it is very interesting question: idealistic position is to wait your approval, realistic position is to release when we need. And, as I said before, we have no fixed date releases. This time we moved balance to the our needs side, next time it could be on your side. Note: no promises JW The main question I have now is only how much value to give to JW your number 5 feature list - especially as I remain concerned JW about the search engine problem when moving from Non-OTFE to OTFE. Number 5 (and any other) doesn't contain any fixed feature list, it reflects that version contains modified (or new) features comparing to previous number. While 1 (from .51) means there is no major finished changes, it is just the same more stable .50 JW And, last but not least, can RL give assurance that we can use 3.51.10 JW without worrying about the message content distortion and loss issues JW that were reported in the early releases of 3.51? Yes, if you mean disappearing symbols from MicroEd -- 9Val Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
Hello Stuart Hemming everyone else, on 26-Jul-2005 at 17:48 you (Stuart Hemming) wrote: if you used the format x.xx.xx then windoze would list them in version number order. Use TweakUI XP, enable intuitive filename sorting in the Explorer options and that little annoyance is a goner. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Why are our days numbered and not, say lettered. -- Woody Allen tweakui.png Description: PNG image Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: CANNOT Repair My IMAP Database (Was: Re: How Do I Repair My IMAP database?)
TBBETA Keith, :snip: No way could I get to a menu to disconnect from the server, nor could I repair the database. :snip: You have to click on the IMAP account, click on the Account -- IMAP Commands --, Disconnect from Server **before** you run folder maintenance, otherwise TB! will interact with the server, possibly trying to read/write to the very file it is trying to fix. If this happens, it may corrupt the file even further or corrupt a previously undamaged folder. After the folder maintenance is complete, you can go back to Accounts -- IMAP Commands -- Connect to Server. :snip: As soon as I started up the new version, I started getting the error popups (this time for 0588F103.TBB). As before, I was asked whether I wanted to repair the message base :snip: I use IMAP (Fastmail) without problems. As long as you leave your e-mails on the IMAP server as intended, you can right click on the folder, Properties and clear the cache. I actually have the Clear cache on exit checked for my high traffic folders and I make sure I dump the cache and rebuild it at least every couple of days or so. An e-mail program that utilizes a local cache for IMAP (POP too for that matter) folders will always corrupt eventually with a high population/high traffic folder due to file fragmentation. The only thing that is corrupt is the local cache on the hard drive, not the files sitting on the IMAP server (although it is possible). It is always a good idea to break down your e-mail folders on the IMAP server into smaller archive folders, grouping by year, month, whatever works for you. :snip: For all other folders, it said Messages recovered: x, damaged parts (part???.bin) saved:0. (Anybody know what this means?) :snip: From TB's Help file: Damaged parts are saved into the folder's home directory with a .BIN extension. Those files may contain parts of damaged messages, so you can view them with any binary file viewer (you can find plenty of them by searching the Internet, even the standard Notepad can be used) and save any relevant information you can find. -- Sawadee, Mike :flag-us-tx: :flag-thailand: Using TB! 3.51.10 Home on Windows XP SP2 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: UUEncode not working?
On 2005-07-26 at 21:19:10 Raymund Tump wrote: I just tried to send a mail with uuencoded attachments but the source code of the message in the sent folder tells me that the mail is still base64 encoded. Can someone confirm? Can't confirm. Attaching a small test file gives the following MIME part headers: 8F1B824C3E20C9A1 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=test.bin Content-transfer-encoding: x-uue Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=test.bin begin 644 test.bin (N`4#,=O-%L,` ` end 8F1B824C3E20C9A1-- How did you try to attach your file? pgp2RFGvmoa7n.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: About 3.51 release
TBBETA, On 7/26/2005, 10:28 AM, you scribbled: 9 Hello Boris, BA So none bug of BugList can be fixed without serious changes? 9 Surely there are a lot of cosmetic fixes and traslation issues, but 9 I don't think somebody will be satisfied with them more than three 9 days. A pearl of wisdom there. Kind of reminds me of getting the kids a new toy, you can start the 72 hour boredom countdown clock immediately. So true and well spoken 9Val. -- Sawadee, Mike :flag-us-tx: :flag-thailand: Using TB! 3.51.10 Home on Windows XP SP2 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: About 3.51 release
TBBETA, On 7/25/2005, 03:14 PM, you scribbled: 9 Hello Jay, JW I understand this. But what is not clear to me is why we went from JW 3.5.30 to 3.5.36 and then jumped to 3.51 without ever seeming to JW complete the 3.5.xx series. 9 Actually 3.51 is the same serie, it just uses new numbering system. I 9 don't think it will be changed soon. JW That makes sense to some extent. But, to my thinking, it is not JW entirely user-friendly. Over the extended period of time that RL will JW be making these big changes, 9 We'll avoid situation like with 3.5 which was prepared 6 months. JW many TB users will probably prefer to JW stick with a safe and stable version - one that has all of the JW components that they need and most of the components that they want. 9 3.51 is more stable than 3.5.30 and has the same components. If you 9 are refering to 3.0.2.10 - it is your choice to use it or any other 9 version. In some aspects 3.5 is far superior than older versions, 9 while in some it really lacks maturity (in example, customizer 9 interface). So the choice which version to use fully depends of your 9 needs. Hey, forget the numbers, just give me the link to the latest and greatest, don't care if it is 3.5.1 or 3.51. :) -- Sawadee, Mike :flag-us-tx: :flag-thailand: Using TB! 3.51.10 Home on Windows XP SP2 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: CANNOT Repair My IMAP Database (Was: Re: How Do I Repair My IMAP database?)
On Tuesday, July 26, 2005 at 3:46:45 PM [GMT -0500], Mike Rourke wrote: :snip: No way could I get to a menu to disconnect from the server, nor could I repair the database. :snip: The pacmen are cute, but the noise level is high in the message when they're so numerous. They're distracting and they don't provide the clarity of quote prefixing with colour contrasting. Additionally, those without smileys enabled will see no immediate difference between what's a quotation from what's your responses. Thought I'd let you know since I appreciate your messages and wish not to have to ignore them or have them ignored by others for the wrong reasons. :) -- -= Curtis =- The Bat! v3.51.10 System Specs: http://specs.aimlink.name -=-=- Silence is more eloquent at times than words. Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: CANNOT Repair My IMAP Database (Was: Re: How Do I Repair My IMAP database?)
TBBETA, On 7/26/2005, 05:02 PM, you scribbled: C On Tuesday, July 26, 2005 at 3:46:45 PM [GMT -0500], Mike Rourke wrote: :snip: No way could I get to a menu to disconnect from the server, nor could I repair the database. :snip: C The pacmen are cute, but the noise level is high in the message when C they're so numerous. They're distracting and they don't provide the C clarity of quote prefixing with colour contrasting. Additionally, those C without smileys enabled will see no immediate difference between what's C a quotation from what's your responses. Thought I'd let you know since I C appreciate your messages and wish not to have to ignore them or have C them ignored by others for the wrong reasons. :) Ohhh, I usually use snip or :snip : (space intended), I never thought it equated to a smiley, guess I'll go back to . Sorry about that... -- Sawadee, Mike :flag-us-tx: :flag-thailand: Using TB! 3.51.10 Home on Windows XP SP2 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: 3.51.10: Problems with msi Install
Paul Van Noord [PVN] wrote, The stuff I develop and distribute uses an *.exe and it works! Yeah, but that's way to easy! :) -- Regards, Ron Secord Using TB! 3.51.10 Professional Under Windows XP 5.1 Service Pack 2 If the conniption fits, wear it! Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
9Val, thank you for your patience with all of my questions. On 7/26/05, 9Val wrote: JW If this be so, when do you suppose RL will look into the issue JW involving the search engine hanging - for me, at least, whenever I try JW to implement OTFE? In other words, the same search in Non-OTFE runs JW fine; but after restoring from backup and trying to search the same JW directories (now under OTFE), the search takes forever. Next beta serie. Slow and hanging search (even in non-OTFE mode) is one of the major objectives. So, given what you said below about version numbering (which I don't entirely get yet, but won't argue any more about either), this next beta series might not be so far in the future and I might actually be able to implement OTFE soon. :Fireworks and Rockets Ascending to Heaven: (hope everyone saw that). JW And, last but not least, can RL give assurance that we can use 3.51.10 JW without worrying about the message content distortion and loss issues JW that were reported in the early releases of 3.51? Yes, if you mean disappearing symbols from MicroEd Yes, more or less. What I'm worried about is only words getting jumbled - like from words getting to wetting. :-) I am also confused about this charset business. I have no idea what is the best charset for me to use. One account seems to be set to default at Latin 9 (ISO) and another account seems to be set to default at Western European (ISO), and I have no idea when I made such a decision. Nowhere was I using Windows Default or US ASCII (and I don't understand what is the difference between the two) or whether that would be better. Groan. All I want is for my messages to go out the same way as I type them. But I guess this is the subject of another thread... one of those (Was...) threads. Again, thanks, 9Val for your patience in answering my questions. -- jaywalker Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro (No OTFE) 3.51.10 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
9Val, thank you for your patience with all of my questions. On 7/26/05, 9Val wrote: JW If this be so, when do you suppose RL will look into the issue JW involving the search engine hanging - for me, at least, whenever I try JW to implement OTFE? In other words, the same search in Non-OTFE runs JW fine; but after restoring from backup and trying to search the same JW directories (now under OTFE), the search takes forever. Next beta serie. Slow and hanging search (even in non-OTFE mode) is one of the major objectives. So, given what you said below about version numbering (which I don't entirely get yet, but won't argue any more about either), this next beta series might not be so far in the future and I might actually be able to implement OTFE soon. :Fireworks and Rockets Ascending to Heaven: (hope everyone saw that). JW And, last but not least, can RL give assurance that we can use 3.51.10 JW without worrying about the message content distortion and loss issues JW that were reported in the early releases of 3.51? Yes, if you mean disappearing symbols from MicroEd Yes, more or less. What I'm worried about is only words getting jumbled - like from words getting to wetting. :-) I am also confused about this charset business. I have no idea what is the best charset for me to use. One account seems to be set to default at Latin 9 (ISO) and another account seems to be set to default at Western European (ISO), and I have no idea when I made such a decision. Nowhere was I using Windows Default or US ASCII (and I don't understand what is the difference between the two) or whether that would be better. Groan. All I want is for my messages to go out the same way as I type them. But I guess this is the subject of another thread... one of those (Was...) threads. Again, thanks, 9Val for your patience in answering my questions. -- jaywalker Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro (No OTFE) 3.51.10 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: About 3.51 release
9Val, thank you for your patience with all of my questions. On 7/26/05, 9Val wrote: JW If this be so, when do you suppose RL will look into the issue JW involving the search engine hanging - for me, at least, whenever I try JW to implement OTFE? In other words, the same search in Non-OTFE runs JW fine; but after restoring from backup and trying to search the same JW directories (now under OTFE), the search takes forever. Next beta serie. Slow and hanging search (even in non-OTFE mode) is one of the major objectives. So, given what you said below about version numbering (which I don't entirely get yet, but won't argue any more about either), this next beta series might not be so far in the future and I might actually be able to implement OTFE soon. :Fireworks and Rockets Ascending to Heaven: (hope everyone saw that). JW And, last but not least, can RL give assurance that we can use 3.51.10 JW without worrying about the message content distortion and loss issues JW that were reported in the early releases of 3.51? Yes, if you mean disappearing symbols from MicroEd Yes, more or less. What I'm worried about is only words getting jumbled - like from words getting to wetting. :-) I am also confused about this charset business. I have no idea what is the best charset for me to use. One account seems to be set to default at Latin 9 (ISO) and another account seems to be set to default at Western European (ISO), and I have no idea when I made such a decision. Nowhere was I using Windows Default or US ASCII (and I don't understand what is the difference between the two) or whether that would be better. Groan. All I want is for my messages to go out the same way as I type them. But I guess this is the subject of another thread... one of those (Was...) threads. Again, thanks, 9Val for your patience in answering my questions. -- jaywalker Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro (No OTFE) 3.51.10 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: RARed betas reset Menu shortcuts
Hello Mary, On Monday, July 25, 2005, at 6:04:36 PM, you wrote re: RARed betas reset Menu shortcuts: I noticed a few weeks ago that when I install a RAR archived beta and run it, that it puts my customized Menu shortcuts back to default. Anyone else notice this? MB Yes, it was from tbuser.def not being conserved. Was reported and then MB listed as fixed in 3.51.10. FYI: I tried to modify a few Menu shortcuts and I ended up with multiple blank spots in my menus. I tried several times with the same result after hitting reset on the menu bar. Resolved: I had to delete my tbuser.def and allow it to be recreated. Then I could modify as it normally should. Apparently somewhere along the line my tbuser.def got corrupted. Perhaps this explains a part of the anomalies I was experiencing. -- Cheers! Wayne Howard Using The Bat! version: 3.51.10 Directory Opus 8: The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for Windows See the tutorial: Getting to know Directory Opus: www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
3.51.10 Muggle Bat
In these days of renewed Pottermania, I am surprised to see that RL is still suppressing its TB wizards. What I mean to say is that in 3.51.10 - and maybe in some earlier versions - I go to my Tools menu and see at the bottom an arrow that is unnamed (Voldemort?) pointing to a submenu that is empty and goes nowhere. Did someone pass out the teleportation powder and just forget to give me some? -- jaywalker Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro (No OTFE) 3.51.10 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
3.51.10 OTFE Search Engine Still Hangs
Just tested this on another machine. Went from 3.51.10 Non-OTFE, where the search engine works okay, through the somewhat painful and time-consuming process of backup and uninstall and reinstall and then finally restore to get the 3.51.10 OTFE implementation of TB. And here on this *third* machine with a very different message base than on the other two machines where I have tested this, once again the TB search engine hangs interminably when searching some folders. So OTFE is still a non-starter in 3.51, for whatever reason. I know this has been explained before, but all that I - and possibly most people - need is to have OTFE on some but not necessarily all accounts. I don't have a problem with OTFE applying to all accounts - if it worked - but I still don't understand why it cannot be implemented on an account-wise basis and in such a way that it can be applied without having to backup, uninstall, and reinstall with restore. Perhaps if RL is doing a grand remake of core code, they can consider changing something to enable this also. -- jaywalker Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro (No OTFE) 3.51.10 Current beta is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
