On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 12:29:47PM +0930, Tom Cook wrote:
On 0, John Habermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
Do support for a community group that recycles computers installs debian
and
gives them to low income people. One of the recipients is issues with
Netscape. Netscape
On 0, John Habermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
Do support for a community group that recycles computers installs debian and
gives them to low income people. One of the recipients is issues with
Netscape. Netscape (4.77-2) doesn't open at all and when netscape is entered
into an xterm
on Thu, Apr 18, 2002, dman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 11:05:24PM +1000, John Habermann wrote:
| Hi
|
| Do support for a community group that recycles computers installs debian
and
| gives them to low income people. One of the recipients is issues with
| Netscape.
Hi
Do support for a community group that recycles computers installs debian and
gives them to low income people. One of the recipients is issues with
Netscape. Netscape (4.77-2) doesn't open at all and when netscape is entered
into an xterm he receives only a line saying Bus error.
Anyone have
Hi
Do some support for a community group that recycles computers, installs
debian and then gives them to low income people. One of the recipients has
issues with Netscape. Netscape (4.77-2) doesn't open at all and when netscape
is entered into an xterm he receives only a line saying Bus
On 18-Apr-2002 John Habermann wrote:
Hi
Do some support for a community group that recycles computers, installs
debian and then gives them to low income people. One of the recipients has
issues with Netscape. Netscape (4.77-2) doesn't open at all and when netscape
is entered into an
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 11:05:24PM +1000, John Habermann wrote:
| Hi
|
| Do support for a community group that recycles computers installs debian and
| gives them to low income people. One of the recipients is issues with
| Netscape. Netscape (4.77-2) doesn't open at all and when netscape is
Carel Fellinger wrote:
Hai,
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:19:29PM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote:
On Aug 16 2000, André Dahlqvist wrote:
quiet a lot of people who seam to like using Netscape to handle
their mail, and I think it's nice to give those people that option.
...
BTW, I
On 26, aug, 2000 at 12:29:26 +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
Hai,
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:19:29PM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote:
On Aug 16 2000, André Dahlqvist wrote:
quiet a lot of people who seam to like using Netscape to handle
their mail, and I think it's nice to give those people
Hai,
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:19:29PM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote:
On Aug 16 2000, André Dahlqvist wrote:
quiet a lot of people who seam to like using Netscape to handle
their mail, and I think it's nice to give those people that option.
...
BTW, I also notice how much people use
Steve Lamb wrote:
I have been specific. I have even given examples! PMMail and The Bat!
Screen shots alone for those two products speak volumes!
I don't know The Bat, but I use PMMail, and it's head and shoulders
above anything else I have seen. I don think it asking too much for
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 10:27:44PM -0400, Neil L. Roeth wrote:
My impression is that you think that to get mail from several sources
with fetchmail and have it put into separate folders requires that you
dump it into a single file and then filter using regular expressions
in procmail.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi there
Can someone explain me what a Bus Error is?
It sounds like a new invention by Micro$oft.
I had this error on a SuSE 6.4 Linux and got a fix from SuSE. It was for
Netscape 4.72 and contained
On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, John Pearson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 07:31:07AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote
Technically, yes. However, if your boss says that work email is not to
touch outside SMTP servers as a matter of policy how far do you think Well,
the SMTP server will route it
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Seth Cohn wrote:
On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, John Pearson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 07:31:07AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote
Technically, yes. However, if your boss says that work email is not
to
touch outside SMTP servers as a matter of policy
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Seth Cohn wrote
On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, John Pearson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 07:31:07AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote
Technically, yes. However, if your boss says that work email is not
to
touch outside SMTP servers as a matter of policy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wednesday, August 23, 2000, 5:33:38 PM, John wrote:
*sigh* bosses, bosses, bosses. All other arguments in this thread
aside, this one is a bit weird. Does your boss realise that any
non-local mail you send via your work SMTP server will be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wednesday, August 23, 2000, 12:30:25 PM, Matthew wrote:
This level of modularization offers far more power and flexibility, as it
becomes easier to implement new features and capabilities (as the amount of
code that has to be re-implemented from
On Aug 23, Steve Lamb ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 09:53:43PM -0700, brian moore wrote:
Huh? From a single source?
Yes, a single source. Fetchmail.
Note that in my example (if you had bothered to read it), you would have
seen that ~/.procmailrc was
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 08:21:53PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 06:21:15PM -0700, brian moore wrote:
Note that the filtering is done by fetchmail. If you don't want
filters, then don't specify that portion of the command line.
Which proves my point that you need to
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 09:53:43PM -0700, brian moore wrote:
Huh? From a single source?
Yes, a single source. Fetchmail.
Note that in my example (if you had bothered to read it), you would have
seen that ~/.procmailrc was irrelevant. Each pop3 mailbox had its own
(optional)
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 09:36:14AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 07:21:38PM +0930, John Pearson wrote:
.forward file allows you to filter your mail into any number of
separate mailfolders at delivery time, based on a wide range of
criteria including the contents of the
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 12:34:17AM -0700, brian moore wrote:
And I fail to see how a single fetchmail process reading from n servers,
with m mailboxes on each, and delivering each remote mailbox to some
number greater than m boxes on your machine is anything but what you
asked for.
I fail
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 09:21:58AM +0930, John Pearson wrote:
Well, that certainly indicates one reason why I'm having difficulty coming
to grips with your requirement; we have a problem over terminology.
Actually, we don't. The problem is that people aren't willing to look
past the
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 01:04:31AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 12:34:17AM -0700, brian moore wrote:
And I fail to see how a single fetchmail process reading from n servers,
with m mailboxes on each, and delivering each remote mailbox to some
number greater than m boxes
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 02:05:35AM -0700, brian moore wrote:
You're the one that keeps bringing up 'accounts'. I keep asking what the
concept of an 'account' has to do with mailboxes.
Mail account.
Again, Steve, I have accounts on machines with no mailboxes. I have
mailboxes on
Steve Lamb wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 12:02:00PM -0500, Mark Schiltz wrote:
After hashing through all your comments, I believe I know what you want.
An email client that has a folder for [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],
etc. (but dosn't call it a folder) with sub-folders for
Steve Lamb wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 06:33:48PM -0400, David Zoll wrote:
[snip]
1) Fetchmail, which will grab the mail from separate accounts, and
stuff it through...
Requires filtering to separate out accounts which should be separate in
the first place.
The way I see it,
Steve Lamb wrote:
[snip]
I have been specific. I have even given examples! PMMail and The Bat!
Screen shots alone for those two products speak volumes!
OK, I've gone and looked at the websites for those two products. I
can't really test either effectively in the real world since:
* both
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 07:50:27AM -0400, Cory Snavely wrote:
If that's the case, how far is Netscape Communicator from doing what you
want (using IMAP)? Have as many IMAP accounts as you want (Netscape
doesn't seem to consider them folders), plus a folder structure for
each, distinct Inboxes
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 10:00:54AM -0400, David Zoll wrote:
OK, I've gone and looked at the websites for those two products. I
can't really test either effectively in the real world since:
* both cost money I'm not willing to spend on this, and;
The Bat! has a 30 day trial period,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 09:27:40AM -0400, David Zoll wrote:
there is a third choice (and I don't mean something that filters but
calls it something else), I'd love to hear about it.
Simply stated, one program that has two instances in itself. Like an
editor which can edit two buffers at
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 07:10:16AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Close, but not perfect. They insist on sending everything out a single
SMTP server.
This requirement I really don't get: what practical difference does it make?
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid
No, I mean exactly what an MUA says it is. Mutt is an MUA but, to me,
it
is not a mail client. A mail client is able to transfer and manipulate
the
required data without need of other programs. A constant example I give,
which is flawed as all are, is web browsing. A web browser is,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 07:31:07AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 09:27:40AM -0400, David Zoll wrote:
[snip-o-rama]
Which can then route the mail to the appropriate mail server. This is
how SMTP was designed to work.
Technically, yes. However, if your boss says that
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 10:50:18AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Right, and have to stuff them into a single account to get at them with a
single client. That, to me, is inelegant. For good reasons I do /not/ mix my
personal and professional email. Using fetchmail in the prescribed manner to
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 21/08/2000 (17:59) :
Hate to tell you but fetchmail is not more elegant. In fact, I find it
quite archaic. I don't know about you, but there is something about pulling 2
accounts worth of mail, dumping them into a single local account and then have
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 05:46:00PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.fetchmailrc can have:
[]
user x is mark here
[]
user y is julie here
Requires a local account for what really isn't a separate account on the
local machine. This is a piss-poor hack.
Alternatively, if you
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 09:52:08AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
I think it is you that has done something wrong in the setup.
No, I refuse to accept a mediocre solution.
I have setup fetchmail on a machine to fetch mail for both users of that
machine from the ISP. One of the users even
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 22/08/2000 (09:58) :
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 09:52:08AM +0200, Preben Randhol wrote:
I think it is you that has done something wrong in the setup.
No, I refuse to accept a mediocre solution.
Would you please explain how you would make the software
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 12:54:58AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 05:46:00PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.fetchmailrc can have:
[]
user x is mark here
[]
user y is julie here
Requires a local account for what really isn't a separate account on the
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 12:54:58AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 05:46:00PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.fetchmailrc can have:
[]
user x is mark here
[]
user y is julie here
Requires a local account for what really isn't a separate account on the
Of course you could also use fetchmail's mda option to make an
account be delivered to an arbitrary file.
But you probably don't care about that. What I've learned from this
long and silly thread is there are plenty of ways to receive mail from
several accounts and keep them separated, but none
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 11:41:17AM -0400, Brendan Cully wrote:
But you probably don't care about that. What I've learned from this
long and silly thread is there are plenty of ways to receive mail from
several accounts and keep them separated, but none that you like. Too
bad.
Great
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 07:21:38PM +0930, John Pearson wrote:
.forward file allows you to filter your mail into any number of
separate mailfolders at delivery time, based on a wide range of
criteria including the contents of the headers.
Now take it a step further, what do you do on the
Steve,
After hashing through all your comments, I believe I know what you want.
An email client that has a folder for [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],
etc. (but dosn't call it a folder) with sub-folders for inbox,outbox,etc. (its
ok to call these folders) for each of the above non-folders.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 12:02:00PM -0500, Mark Schiltz wrote:
An email client that has a folder for [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],
etc. (but dosn't call it a folder) with sub-folders for inbox,outbox,etc. (its
ok to call these folders) for each of the above non-folders. Does that about
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 12:02:00PM -0500, Mark Schiltz wrote:
An email client that has a folder for [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],
etc. (but dosn't call it a folder) with sub-folders for inbox,outbox,etc.
(its
ok to call these folders) for
Steve Lamb wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 11:41:17AM -0400, Brendan Cully wrote:
But you probably don't care about that. What I've learned from this
long and silly thread is there are plenty of ways to receive mail from
several accounts and keep them separated, but none that you like.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 06:33:48PM -0400, David Zoll wrote:
OK, you want mail from separate accounts to be collected into separate
locations in one account, each with their own set of subfolders, and a
mail client which can understand this, and send outgoing mail
appropriately for the account
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 05:10:54PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 06:33:48PM -0400, David Zoll wrote:
OK, you want mail from separate accounts to be collected into separate
locations in one account, each with their own set of subfolders, and a
mail client which can
On Tue, Aug 22, 2000 at 06:21:15PM -0700, brian moore wrote:
Note that the filtering is done by fetchmail. If you don't want
filters, then don't specify that portion of the command line.
Which proves my point that you need to filter from a single source.
Completely stupid.
3)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wednesday, August 16, 2000, 6:19:39 PM, John wrote:
from the fetchmail man page:
Too bad fetchmail isn't a client, huh?
- --
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wednesday, August 16, 2000, 6:30:22 PM, John wrote:
i do appreciate that the fetchmail approach is more elegant.. but it is more
daunting too.
Hate to tell you but fetchmail is not more elegant. In fact, I find it
quite archaic. I don't know
If you have dialup access with many users with different pop accounts (like my
family
once), you can grab everybody's mail as soon as anyone connects with ppp. That
way,
nobody has to dial in to check mail--it's already grabbed.
Also, you can grab pop mail from multiple servers if you're like
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 10:11:17 AM, Michael wrote:
Also, you can grab pop mail from multiple servers if you're like the typical
guy and have 5+ mail addresses.
Right, and have to stuff them into a single account to get at them with a
single
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 10:50:18AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Right, and have to stuff them into a single account to get at them with a
single client. That, to me, is inelegant. For good reasons I do /not/ mix my
personal and professional email. Using fetchmail in the prescribed manner to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 11:11:42 AM, Mark wrote:
I strongly suspect that Gnus can do what you want, but I've not actually
tried. It certainly supports multiple servers and folders and can
conditionally set headers based upon various criteria.
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 11:35:29AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Monday, August 21, 2000, 11:11:42 AM, Mark wrote:
I strongly suspect that Gnus can do what you want, but I've not actually
tried. It certainly supports multiple servers and folders and can
conditionally set headers based upon
Steve Lamb wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 10:11:17 AM, Michael wrote:
Also, you can grab pop mail from multiple servers if you're like the typical
guy and have 5+ mail addresses.
Right, and have to stuff them into a single account to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 1:42:58 PM, Mike wrote:
Wrong. mutt can do that just fine.
Don't even try to kid me on that aspect ok? The day mutt can send mail
out my work SMTP from home (yes, that level of separation) is the day I'll
concede.
Steve Lamb wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 1:42:58 PM, Mike wrote:
Wrong. mutt can do that just fine.
Don't even try to kid me on that aspect ok? The day mutt can send mail
out my work SMTP from home (yes, that level of separation) is
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 05:01:38PM -0400, Mike Werner wrote:
Steve Lamb wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 1:42:58 PM, Mike wrote:
Wrong. mutt can do that just fine.
Don't even try to kid me on that aspect ok? The day mutt can send
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 2:01:38 PM, Mike wrote:
Oh, you meant actually send it out through different servers? I thought you
were just meaning the message addressing - i.e. what From: line is used.
Seems I misunderstood exactly what you meant.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 2:14:00 PM, brian wrote:
Considering that mutt doesn't do SMTP with anything, Steve's demand
probably will never happen.
(Though there are certainly ways to do it, the SMTP configuration ain't
part of Mutt.)
Right.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Monday, August 21, 2000, 12:44:11 PM, kmself wrote:
If it did do it I'd love to see the actual mail reading removed from the
editor.
Ok. Let's wait a little bit more about it. And hope it gets
smaller. :-)
Mozilla 1.0 will bring peace to earth, I just know it:-)
--
But let's face it, a debug build of Moz is a dog. Do we really need
Athlons to surf the web?
On Aug 18 2000, John Leuner wrote:
But let's face it, a debug build of Moz is a dog. Do we really need
Athlons to surf the web?
That was exactly my point. Most users (unfortunately, might I
add) don't care for free software or for proprietary software.
They care about
On Sat, Aug 19, 2000 at 07:17:59PM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote:
In that case, they might just use an older version of Windows with
Internet Explorer and they are able to see the web more confortably
than using Linux and Netscape.
If a user don't see any benefits from using Linux he obviously
It means Netscape is crap software.
It *will* crash. Frequently. Get used to it.
Disable Java and Javascript. This will help. I've noticed sensitivity
to libs, with significant changes in NS behavior between various system
updates.
Mozilla should improve much of this, but the default build
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 02:38:04AM -0500, Eric Gillespie, Jr. wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:15:00AM -0700,
kmself@ix.netcom.com kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
complex for a basic browser. Gzilla and/or Gnutella look like
far more promising projects. Both are based on the Gecko
rendering
kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
It means Netscape is crap software.
Not everyone has these kinds of troubles with Netscape. I'm not
saying its great, because it isn't, but neither is it crap software.
It *will* crash. Frequently. Get used to it.
I manage to trip a bug
On Aug 16 2000, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Mozilla should improve much of this, but the default build is far
too complex for a basic browser.
Not to mention that this implies that Mozilla is *slow* (since
it doesn't fit in core), depending on what it is doing (for
basic
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 04:48:02AM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote:
Not to mention that this implies that Mozilla is *slow* (since
it doesn't fit in core), depending on what it is doing (for
basic navigation, it is ok; opening a new window makes it
slow; navigating through the Preferences menus is
Rogerio Brito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 16/08/2000 (11:44) :
may continue to use w3m or links or lynx as our nice text
browsers. All three are packaged in potato. :-)
w3m is now my default browser. I use it more than netscape as I'm more
concerned about the content of the pages
Are there any graphical browsers that will run on the console and render
to framebuffer or GGI, and currently work fairly well? I remember hearing
about one, but don't remember the name, and I recall at the time it was
in alpha/developmental stage.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Rogerio Brito wrote:
On
Hi,
It means Netscape is crap software.
Not everyone has these kinds of troubles with Netscape. I'm not
saying its great, because it isn't, but neither is it crap software.
Bus-Error occurs sometimes when you're using Java. Deactivate it and see
how it goes.
cu
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 04:42:26AM -0400, Ed Cogburn wrote:
kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
It means Netscape is crap software.
Not everyone has these kinds of troubles with Netscape. I'm not
saying its great, because it isn't, but neither is it crap software.
I stand by my
Dear
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:04:09AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there any graphical browsers that will run on the console and render
to framebuffer or GGI, and currently work fairly well? I remember hearing
about one, but don't remember the name, and I recall at the time it was
=?iso-8859-15?Q?Andr=E9_Dahlqvist?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
browser you can do so. I am pretty sure that we will see a browser-only
debian package of Mozilla pretty soon, and a mailnews package for those
who want that. Looking at mail headers over the years have tought me
The current
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:50:04PM +0200, Joachim Trinkwitz wrote:
The current mozilla Debian package (M17-1 here) *is* a browser-only
version (unfortunately, it has no themes either).
Someone said that this was not actually the case, and stated that it
seamed more like a permission thing on
On Aug 16 2000, André Dahlqvist wrote:
Like I have said before, this is constantly improving.
Which is good. I sincerely hope its size decreases. BTW,
AFAICR, Debian's packaged version of M17 does not include the
mail and news client. I will experiment to see if.
The
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:19:29 -0300, Rogerio Brito said:
BTW, I also notice how much people use Netscape to handle
their mail and when I install Linux for my friends I install
it also, for the following convenience: you don't need an MTA
in your machine for the
what netscape mail does... and very few linux mail clients do..
is truncate large messages...
its pretty essential for dial-up users who get volumes of mail with
attachments...
i've bent the ear of both the pronto and the evolution teams and they both seem
to have taken on board what i was
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:19:29PM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote:
Interestingly enough, the most common machines nowadays in my country
seem to be Celeron or K6-2 machines with 32MB of RAM. This makes
surfing the web with Linux almost a nightmare (even if you turn on
UDMA/66 so that swapping is
André Dahlqvist wrote:
Don't forget that the Mozilla team created Gecko,...
Where do get Gecko?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:09:42PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Where do get Gecko?
Gecko is the rendering engine that Mozilla, and now other projects
use. It is not a browser by itself, if that's what you though.
--
// André
John Griffiths writes:
what netscape mail does... and very few linux mail clients do..
is truncate large messages...
from the fetchmail man page:
Resource Limit Control Options
-l maxbytes, --limit maxbytes
(Keyword: limit) Takes a maximum octet size argu
John Hasler wrote:
This puts the size limiting function where it belongs and does not destroy
mail.
--
learning to use/master fetchmail is on my list of things to do (somewhere after
getting a useable X in debian)
but in the meantime i need to get my mail
the windows model of mail client
André writes:
It [Gecko] is not a browser by itself, if that's what you though.
I keep hoping for a plain, simple browser that just works. Oh, well.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
John Griffiths writes:
learning to use/master fetchmail is on my list of things to do...
Install and run fetchmailconf.
(somewhere after getting a useable X in debian)
Which fetchmailconf requires, unfortunately.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi there
Can someone explain me what a Bus Error is?
It sounds like a new invention by Micro$oft.
- --
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.1i
iQA/AwUBOZnIqqFxQTtRrRT1EQIRIgCfRzbFcj9owj9bJackLZvei2RznMYAnip0
Obrigado pela ajuda. Reinstalei as bibliotecas de que o Netscape
dependia
e
agora está funcionando.
Carlos Emir Mantovani Macedo wrote:
Olá,
Tenho instalado em meu notebook, um Toshiba Satellite 330CDS, o
Communicator 473. Ao executá-lo recebo a mensagem Bus error.
Helio Loureiro wrote:
O netscape usa a biblioteca libstdc++.so.2.8.x. Vc por acaso
não a removeu do sistema ou fez um upgrade (que pode estar gerando o
erro)?
Na verdade depende do libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1, eu instalei em duas maquinas
e nao me lembro desse erro com o atual
Olá,
Tenho instalado em meu notebook, um Toshiba Satellite 330CDS, o
Communicator 473. Ao executá-lo recebo a mensagem Bus error.
Anteriormente funcionava perfeitamente, mas de uma hora para outra isso
passou a acontecer. Alguém tem alguma idéia?
Desde já agradeço.
Tenho instalado em meu notebook, um Toshiba Satellite 330CDS, o
Communicator 473. Ao executá-lo recebo a mensagem Bus error.
Anteriormente funcionava perfeitamente, mas de uma hora para outra isso
passou a acontecer. Alguém tem alguma idéia?
O netscape usa a biblioteca
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Dear fellow d-users:
I removed the realplayer.deb and netscape works fine. I consulted the message
about the RealPlayer.deb in another message.
Thanks for the suggestions, nevertheless.
Eric K. Wolven
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (rick) writes:
In article
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Eric K. Wolven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm getting bus error when I start netscape navigator (4.72) from xterm.
Also some cranking from hd when I menu-click, but then no go.
Does switching to the libc5 version of Navigator (the
Netscape crashed hard on me the other day.. now whenever i try to run it
from the command line i get
Bus Error
anyone know what i have to do to fix this?
-jason
When you are courting a nice girl an hour seems like a second. When you
sit on a red-hot cinder a second seems like an hour.
Ya, I just had a similar problem. Uninstall plugger and that should fix
it.
Rob
On Mon, 24 Jan 2000, jason wrote:
Netscape crashed hard on me the other day.. now whenever i try to run it
from the command line i get
Bus Error
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
