Re: [Evolution-hackers] single-key keyboard shortcuts
On April 9, 2019 8:50:57 AM MDT, Andre Klapper wrote: >On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 16:15 +0200, Lukas Pirl wrote: >> tl;dr: How to achieve keyboard shortcuts which work w/o modifiers? > >That makes me wonder first why you cannot / don't want to use a >modifier? > >andre >-- >Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net >https://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ > > >___ >evolution-hackers mailing list >evolution-hackers@gnome.org >To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... >https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers I quit using Evolution and went back to Thunderbird years ago. This insistence on stupid "Control-]" instead of "n" was one major reason. Why require two hands when one is enough. I use the other one to eat breakfast and coffee. -- Knowledge is Power -- Power Corrupts Study Hard -- Be Evil ___ evolution-hackers mailing list evolution-hackers@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Colon is a show-stopper.
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Reid Thompson wrote: > On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 11:01 -0400, Mark Filipak wrote: > > Here is a typical message file: > > > > ~/.local/share/evolution/mail/local/cur/1365462216.8388_1.Iris:2,S > > > > Can I persuade Evolution to use some other character in lieu of the > colon? This > > is very important to me... it's a show-stopper. > > > > Thanks - Mark Filipak. > > why is it a showstopper? > He is probably copying them to, or using a network share of an NTFS filesystem. The colon is reserved for drive letter separation and possibly alternate data streams, if those are enabled. Some of the file copy tools I use like WinSCP convert colons to %3A when naming the file. This works as long as you have it set to do the conversion both to and from consistently and don't change it. ___ evolution-hackers mailing list evolution-hackers@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Required Evolution-code-help
On Thu, 2013-02-21 at 10:26 +0100, Milan Crha wrote: > > After doing a lot of R&D my intuition says that it is a memory > > corruption issue. > > valgrind usually helps in such cases. You can run evolution like this: >$ valgrind --num-callers=50 evolution &>log.txt > and valgrind will check evolution for some memory issues. I would like to offer a hint here. I have done this in the past and I recommend using a test user account with only a very few test emails in it. When I attempted to run valgrind evolution on my own email account it never actually managed to load. I killed it after several minutes. Valgrind slows everything down. -- Knowledge Is Power Power Corrupts Study Hard Be Evil ___ evolution-hackers mailing list evolution-hackers@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] moving messages is visually slow
On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 10:44 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 11:10 -0300, David Roguin wrote: > > I've noticed that moving messages takes considerably more time than > > deleting them. Visually when I delete a message I see the item > > disappear almost instantly, I'd like to achieve the same thing when I > > move a message. [snip] > I suppose we could play more tricks with the message list to give the > appearance that messages are removed instantly, but the message list is > already rife with such tricks, and each new one makes it harder to keep > the logic clear and thus harder to maintain. I'm happy to review a > patch, though, if you still want to attempt it. Please make sure that you have a good way to inform the user so that he knows Evolution is busy. He needs to know when it is okay to suspend the laptop or pull the networking cable out. -- Knowledge Is Power Power Corrupts Study Hard Be Evil signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-hackers mailing list evolution-hackers@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] issues in configuration
On 4/21/10 7:47 AM, Roberto Guido wrote: - is there any reason for which the tab "Automatic Contacts" is in "Mail Preferences" section instead of "Contacts"? It is really required to permit enabling/disabling sync with Pidgin, or can this be done always? Is there any valid reason for which someone may avoid integrate contacts between those applications? I certainly needed this option a while ago. I had contacts multiplying all over the place, it seemed like more every time I launched Evo. But if it is now guaranteed bug free I suppose it isn't needed. - is the "Top Posting Option" really necessary? I know it is blamed by all power-users, I know it is preferred by all low-end users, but really cannot understand the need to put the signature also above the quoted text. This is actually really nice. For mail clients that aren't completely stupid, they automatically remove everything below the signature from future quotes. This prevents building up email with the 5 MB reply trail. -- Zan Lynx zl...@acm.org "Knowledge is Power. Power Corrupts. Study Hard. Be Evil." ___ evolution-hackers mailing list evolution-hackers@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Moving from the single mbox file format for the local folders
On 12/16/09 5:18 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: I fell it will be slower compared to the other approach. You dont rewrite the file entirely at all in normal usage. Setting mail flags was mentioned as the reason for not using maildir. Adding a mail flag to an mbox mail requires rewriting the whole file. Or do you assume that you can overwrite just some bytes in an existing mail header? That will still lead to writing a complete sector to disk, in contrast to renaming a file which I expect to be implemented more intelligently by the file system. Actually, writing a micro-benchmark for this is doable. Before you seriously consider investing effort into this, I'd really prefer to see some hard data for a "rename vs. rewrite" comparison. Ever since the early controversy in ext4 over lost data in KDE configuration files, file renames force an ordered journal commit in ext4. So file rename is more expensive than you may think. This is of course still cheaper than fsync, if Evolution makes a habit of fsync'ing its email files. -- Zan Lynx zl...@acm.org "Knowledge is Power. Power Corrupts. Study Hard. Be Evil." ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] HTML composer as a standalone program?
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 17:35 -0700, Zan Lynx wrote: > Someone needs to go and fix Evo so it properly converts & to & > inside HREF attributes again. It's been broken this whole release. I > hate having to save the email to disk and reopen it from Firefox in > order to properly use the links in some emails. Boy am I embarrassed. It must have got fixed in 2.12.2 because it works now. Sorry about that. -- Zan Lynx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] HTML composer as a standalone program?
On Sun, 2007-11-25 at 13:22 -0500, Matthew Barnes wrote: [cut] > Evolution merely wraps GtkHTML's Bonobo-based HTML editor with > additional buttons and menus that make it suitable as an email composer. > There's a simple standalone test program in GtkHTML under > components/html-editor/test_editor that may serve as a starting point > for your needs. I believe Evolution uses its very own fork of GtkHTML, as I discover each time I try to file a bug against GtkHTML and get told its an Evolution-only bug. Someone needs to go and fix Evo so it properly converts & to & inside HREF attributes again. It's been broken this whole release. I hate having to save the email to disk and reopen it from Firefox in order to properly use the links in some emails. -- Zan Lynx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Copyright of Camel's individual source files
On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 11:34 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 17:22 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: [cut] > > The problem would be that otherwise if the authors of these libraries > > would want to move their work to a newer version of the LGPL license, > > Camel's license might turn out to be incompatible with this. > > > > Which is something to avoid, I think. > > It doesn't work that way... (L)GPLv3 apps/libs can use (L)GPLv2 libs > without a problem, it's the other way around that doesn't work. LGPLv2-only is OK, but not GPLv2-only. Any binary resulting from a mixture containing GPLv2-only code must also be GPLv2-only. So a GPLv3 program cannot link with a GPLv2-only library. (unless, for other reasons, the link does not create a derived work.) -- Zan Lynx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Crazy Bug in Evolution? Glib? GTKHTML? GCC?
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 11:27 -0400, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote: > On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 21:20 -0600, Zan Lynx wrote: > > Ok, first off, I am a AMD-64 Gentoo user. I know nobody cares about our > > bug reports but I've reached the end of my rope so I am looking for > > help. As you'll see, my rope is pretty long. :) > > > > I'm reporting this here since so far, I have only seen it with the new > > Evolution 2.8. Other software is GCC 4.1.1, Glib 2.12.3, gtkhtml 3.12, > > gdk-pixbuf 0.22, GTK+ 2.10.3 > > > > > > Something occurred to me since we talked last night. Do you by any > chance have gtk+ built with -O3 or -finline-functions? If so, could you > rebuild it with -O2? This sounds like just the sort of random crashes > we've been seeing with gtk+ built with high optimizations. > > I've just modified the gtk+ ebuilds to strip CFLAGS down to upstream > approved levels. Actually, it isn't -O3 or -finline-functions. It is -Os. I tried several variants and ended up with: CFLAGS="-march=athlon64 -pipe -O2 -g -DNDEBUG -finline-functions -ffast-math -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -ftree-vectorize -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=1 -ftree-loop-linear" And that works just fine. But -Os, even by itself, creates the problem. It is likely a GCC bug. -- Zan Lynx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
[Evolution-hackers] Crazy Bug in Evolution? Glib? GTKHTML? GCC?
Ok, first off, I am a AMD-64 Gentoo user. I know nobody cares about our bug reports but I've reached the end of my rope so I am looking for help. As you'll see, my rope is pretty long. :) I'm reporting this here since so far, I have only seen it with the new Evolution 2.8. Other software is GCC 4.1.1, Glib 2.12.3, gtkhtml 3.12, gdk-pixbuf 0.22, GTK+ 2.10.3 First, the symptoms. I open a message in LKML to read and Evolution seg-faults. It isn't just any message, but messages with a long CC line, which are common on LKML. It has to be long enough to make Evolution want to draw the little plus sign next to the CC line. Long research with GDB revealed a few things. Deep inside GTKHTML and the GDK pixbuf loader there are Glib closures being invoked. The crash is caused by calling the POST_NOTIFY closure_invoke_notifiers with a NULL closure. At first I thought some code must be writing over the closure value by a buffer overrun. But no, that is not it. As best I can tell, the trick is that, at least with my compiler, the closure variable is stashed in register RBX (amd-64, remember). The assembly code expects RBX to still be correct after the return from calling marshal(closure, ...) (glib's gclosure.c:490) marshal is a function pointer, and tracing it down the call stack seems endless, the backtrace ended up over 30 deep before I gave up. This glib closures code is crazy. When it gets back up to g_closure_invoke again and completes marshal(closure,...), the RBX register is set to 0. I verified that this really is the problem by using GDB to set the register back to the value which closure had before the marshal call. Result: a perfect little plus image next to CC. So my best guess is that one of the functions *somewhere* in that mess isn't following the right sort of AMD-64 call conventions. I'm sharing this with y'all in hopes someone might see the same thing, have a burst of divine inspiration, has already fixed it, or something similar to that. If any of you Evolution people are also, or talk to, the Glib and GTKHTML people, feel free to share this. :) I'll probably put this on the GCC lists myself after trying a few more variations of compilation options. It takes a while to rebuild all that code. If anyone does see a crash while reading LKML messages with extra long CC lines, here is my GDB script. It could be helpful. file /usr/bin/evolution break main run --disable-crash-dialog break html_engine_url_requested_cb break gclosure.c:490 disable 3 commands 2 silent enable 3 ignore 3 5 continue end continue -- Zan Lynx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Windows version status?
On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 11:43 +, Tor Lillqvist wrote: > On må, 2006-05-08 at 11:46 +0100, Pejvan BEIGUI wrote: > > > I have been following the Evolution mailing list for a while now, but > > I can't seem to find any information about the Windows port, > > mentionned here: > > http://go-evolution.org/Evo2.6#W32.2Fx64_portingeven though the > > 2.6 has now been released. > > It's a wiki, you are free to add stuff there if you intend to help with > a port to 64-bit Windows, if that is what the rather cryptic mention on > that page means... I personally don't have any plans to port Evolution > to 64-bit Windows. (Well, actually, building *Evolution* for 64-bit > Windows would presumably not be a big deal at all, once all the > dependencies are in place. Hint: none of them, not even a suitable > compiler, are.) Now, what would be neat would be a port to .NET 2.0 Managed C, especially if it could be done without architecture dependencies. Then one build would work on x86, x86_64, IA64, etc. I, however, am not volunteering. -- Zan Lynx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
