I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM. Also, haven't seen an update in a while. So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing the point where I cannot any longer
stick with SM.
Kind of sad since I've been with it since Netscape back in, about, 1995.
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 23:40:
On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:
On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
HenriK wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
HenriK wrote:
In trying to update a copy of SM v.2.30 to the latest version on a
Win7Home Premium PC, the update fails and an error message is
returned claiming a 2nd version of SM is running. After a
file-by-file search using Windows Explorer, I
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Tue, 07 Jul 2015 16:07:19 +0200, Ray_Net
tbrraymond.schmit...@tbrscarlet.be wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote on 07/07/2015 15:48:
On Tue, 07 Jul 2015 02:43:58 -0400, Ed Mullen ejemo...@edmullen.net
wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here
Daniel wrote:
and, Jonathan and others, just FYI, it's my belief that if the sniffers
sniffed for the term Gecko rather than the actual name then they would
accept Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera (and probably others), at a minimum
Opera uses Webkit, so why would a sniffer accept it by looking
David E. Ross wrote:
On 7/5/2015 11:26 PM, Ray_Net wrote:
A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr
Where in cannot find SeaMonkey
This is the result of invalid user-agent sniffing. See my
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
HenriK wrote:
In trying to update a copy of SM v.2.30 to the latest version on a
Win7Home Premium PC, the update fails and an error message is
returned claiming a 2nd version of SM is running. After a
file-by-file search using Windows Explorer, I couldn't find any
Daniel wrote:
On 6/07/2015 9:41 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
Daniel wrote:
On 6/07/2015 5:36 PM, Yamo' wrote:
Yamo' a écrit le 06/07/2015 09:19 :
I didn't found any 2.35b1-candidates on :
http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/
Or alpha?
As SM 2.35 is going to be a
EE wrote:
Daniel wrote:
and, Jonathan and others, just FYI, it's my belief that if the sniffers
sniffed for the term Gecko rather than the actual name then they would
accept Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera (and probably others), at a minimum
Opera uses Webkit, so why would a sniffer accept it by
I decided to try SeaMonkey 2.36 on my Mac from Tinderbox builds on the
Moz FTP site, and it would not start. I compared the contents of the
app package of 2.36 with 2.35 and found that in the MacOS folder,
libmozalloc.dylib is missing in SM 2.36. When I copied that file from
SM 2.35 to 2.36,
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of development of
SM.
Also,
haven't seen an update in a while. So, I'm beginning to feel that I'm nearing
the
point
where I cannot any longer stick with SM.
(snip)
Thoughts?
Why bother
How would you create a filter for a poster that continually changes the
email address like this poster,if you want to see examples look at uk.legal
Col.edmund J.bourke hisburkens...@usa.com
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
Ed Mullen wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM. Also, haven't seen an update in a while. So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing the point where I cannot any longer
stick with SM.
Kind of sad since I've been with it since Netscape back in,
Ray_Net wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote on 07/07/2015 15:48:
On Tue, 07 Jul 2015 02:43:58 -0400, Ed Mullen ejemo...@edmullen.net
wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM. Also, haven't seen an update in a while. So, I'm
beginning to feel
Ed Mullen wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of development of
SM. Also,
haven't seen an update in a while. So, I'm beginning to feel that I'm nearing
the point
where I cannot any longer stick with SM.
(snip)
Thoughts?
Why bother updating?
Just change your
On 7/07/2015 1:49 AM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 09:04:30 -0400, Jonathan N. Little
lws4...@gmail.com wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 08:26:19 +0200, Ray_Net
tbrraymond.schmit...@tbrscarlet.be wrote:
A site,
On 6/07/2015 9:41 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
Daniel wrote:
On 6/07/2015 5:36 PM, Yamo' wrote:
Yamo' a écrit le 06/07/2015 09:19 :
I didn't found any 2.35b1-candidates on :
http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/
Or alpha?
As SM 2.35 is going to be a Contributed Version
cmcadams wrote:
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
Same, but I do manual scans once a week, for form's sake. First and only time I ever
got
got was a Java update that changed its own settings, and I stupidly didn't
check. No more
Java, here.
Yah, I do a full scan once per week
Edmund Wong wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM. Also, haven't seen an update in a while. So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing the point where I cannot any longer
stick with SM.
Kind of sad since I've been with it
When will SeaMonkey give an update on the homepage about the situation?
There has not been an update since March, and to potential users it
looks like the project is dead. I've heard there has been some issues
with trying to build new versions recently (don't know what the issue is
exactly)
On 07/07/2015 08:51 PM, Mike wrote:
When will SeaMonkey give an update on the homepage about the situation?
There has not been an update since March, and to potential users it
looks like the project is dead. I've heard there has been some issues
with trying to build new versions recently (don't
Daniel wrote on 07/07/2015 12:16:
On 7/07/2015 1:49 AM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 09:04:30 -0400, Jonathan N. Little
lws4...@gmail.com wrote:
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 08:26:19 +0200, Ray_Net
Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote on 07/07/2015 15:48:
On Tue, 07 Jul 2015 02:43:58 -0400, Ed Mullen ejemo...@edmullen.net
wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM. Also, haven't seen an update in a while. So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing
In news:2o-dnvmjkvvwdghinz2dnuu7-lwdn...@mozilla.org,
Paul Bergsagel pbergsa...@shaw.ca wrote:
Does SeaMonkey benefit, in the long run, with such a rapid
update schedule? If SeaMonkey adopted a less frequent update
schedule would the net benefits be greater than if SeaMonkey
continued with
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
cmcadams wrote:
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
Same, but I do manual scans once a week, for form's sake. First and only time I
ever got
got was a Java update that changed its own settings, and I stupidly didn't
check.
No more
Java, here.
Yah, I do
cmcadams wrote:
I keep multiple partition backups on an external disk, and if something happens,
usually because of something I did, I can revert without much angst. Saves
needing to
get fancy. I've never had anything get beyond a boot partition, that I know of.
But
if it did having the
Paul Bergsagel wrote:
Maybe the time has come to reconsider how often SeaMonkey needs to be
updated. Does SeaMonkey benefit, in the long run, with such a rapid
update schedule? If SeaMonkey adopted a less frequent update schedule
would the net benefits be greater than if SeaMonkey
cmcadams wrote:
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
cmcadams wrote:
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
Same, but I do manual scans once a week, for form's sake. First and only time I
ever got
got was a Java update that changed its own settings, and I stupidly didn't
check.
No more
Java,
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
cmcadams wrote:
I keep multiple partition backups on an external disk, and if
something happens,
usually because of something I did, I can revert without much angst.
Saves needing to
get fancy. I've never had anything get beyond a boot partition, that
I know of. But
Ed Mullen wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM. Also, haven't seen an update in a while. So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing the point where I cannot any
longer stick with SM.
Kind of sad since I've been with it since Netscape back
30 matches
Mail list logo
