Hæ!
I am not sure, but I think I am experiencing this since v2.12 RC/1. I
am using FireFox 0.9.2 as my standard browser.
When I click on an URL in TB, *two* browser windows are opened. Both
contain the same URL.
Can anybody confirm this behaviour?
--
Kveðja!
Thorvald Neumann | aesir media
Hello Plan9,
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004, at 10:50:03 [GMT -0400] (which was 10:50:03
AM in NY, USA) Plan9 wrote:
Yes it does show and all others show properly as well until I close
the View Folder window and reopen it. Then the whole process starts
again.
Just an idea. It may not be related at
Hey Thorvald!
even (on 11.07.2004 at 17:12) did you write:
Can anybody confirm this behaviour?
1. Open Explorer
2. Select Tools and then Folder Options
3. Select the File Types tab
4. Select Extension: (NONE), File Type: HyperText Transfer Protocol
5. Click Advanced toward the bottom of the
Hello Thorvald,
Sunday, July 11, 2004, 10:12:58 AM, Thorvald Neumann wrote:
TN I
TN am using FireFox 0.9.2 as my standard browser.
TN When I click on an URL in TB, *two* browser windows are opened. Both
TN contain the same URL.
TN Can anybody confirm this behaviour?
confirmed only when
Dear Dierk,
@11-Jul-2004, 15:57 +0200 (11-Jul 14:57 UK time) Dierk Haasis said
to Marck:
So, please (for our sake as well as yours) correct this problem.
Hopefully this doesn't duplicate, just had a little trouble with
my first answer.
Okay.
If the picture in question is the one I saw on
On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 07:34:36AM -0700 or thereabouts, Kevin Amazon
wrote in part:
Hi 9Val
Hello Jakub,
JM finding with Found 0 messages. Why? Is it not possible to
finding
JM messages in VFs? :-|
Not yet.
JM [3.]
JM set this CT to some messages they haven't strikeout font
Hello tbbeta,
I have recently been seeing the wrong picture in the header. This
is mostly happening in some junk mail I seem to receive regularly.
I have traced the problem to someone (no names, but not difficult to
figure out who :) ) who has used :: as their signature instead of
Hello Paul!
On Sunday, July 11, 2004 at 4:47:46 PM you wrote:
if you get them at all, you still have to trust a web site. How do we
know some of those smilies don't have web bots in them now??
Yip, I wrote that. And I answered the question myself, didn't I?
--
Dierk Haasis
:Dierk: Copy
Hello Dierk,
Sunday, July 11, 2004, 8:46:17 AM, Dierk Haasis wrote:
DH *BTW, Greg, is it a second generation GW or the SW?
Well I'm not sure what you mean here and a little OT. So I'll expand.
First their is a little ego and a little bit of a use of an acronym. For
me GW = GoldWing as well as
Sunday, July 11, 2004, 9:46:17 AM, Dierk wrote:
DH If it is the drawing I've seen the rules should be bend.
The system of approval should be fair to users and easy to administer
by the Approver(s). By fair it should be open to everyone. Photos
are fair. By easy it should cause a lesser amount of
Hello Plan9,
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 10:50:03 -0400 GMT (11/07/2004, 21:50 +0700 GMT),
Plan9 wrote:
P Yes it does show and all others show properly as well until I close
P the View Folder window and reopen it. Then the whole process starts
P again.
Yes, it's known. -- I don't know whether :-) or
Hæ!
Sunday, July 11, 2004, 19:05, Carsten Knobloch wrote:
4. Select Extension: (NONE), File Type: HyperText Transfer Protocol
There is no Extension (NONE).
--
Kveðja!
Thorvald Neumann | aesir media
http://www.aesir.de/
[The Bat! v2.12 RC/3 (without BayesIt) PopFile on Windows 2000 Service
Hello Marck!
On Sunday, July 11, 2004 at 6:08:33 PM you wrote:
Do you know for certain it is his likeness?
Apart from a view German users no one knows if my picture represents
my likeness.
And I say that the rogues are supposed to be our pictures. Ways to
say this is me - pleased to meet
Dear Greg,
@11-Jul-2004, 12:17 -0500 (11-Jul 18:17 UK time) Greg Strong said to
Carsten:
... snip
CK 7. Clear the DDE message box (which should contain %1)
CK 8. Click OK, Click OK
... snip
I tried this and info in DDE message box %1,,-1,0 after it
is cleared, and click OK 2 times comes
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004, Carsten posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in regards to Firefox 0.9.2 and links from TB :
CK 1. Open Explorer
CK 2. Select Tools and then Folder Options
CK 3. Select the File Types tab
CK 4. Select Extension: (NONE), File Type: HyperText Transfer
CK Protocol
CK 5. Click Advanced
Batters:
DH On Sunday, July 11, 2004 at 4:47:19 PM you wrote:
At least the user then has a choice to download from a known
source, cancel the operation, or choose another URL.
DH Sorry, that does not address the concerns I brought up.
`--[end quote]
All it
Hi Kevin,
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 15:02:46 -0700 UTC (7/11/2004, 5:02 PM -0500 UTC my
time), Kevin Amazon wrote:
Additionally, the IMAP RFC specifically calls for the term EXPUNGE, not
purging, nor compressing. This IMO should be corrected in TB! when using an
IMAP account, to differentiate,
Hi Allie,
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:27:02 -0500 UTC (7/11/2004, 4:27 PM -0500 UTC my
time), Allie Martin wrote:
A I see that there are no purge options for IMAP and wonder if compression
A and purging do the same for an IMAP folder in TB!. Upon reviewing the
A folder options anyway, I see that
Hi Allie Martin
-
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004, at 16:27:02 [GMT -0500] (which was 2:27 PM where
I live) you wrote:
Removing messages marked for deletion in an IMAP folder is expunging
or in TB! *compressing*. Even for a POP account, deleting a message in
On Sunday, July 11, 2004, 4:50 PM, you wrote:
P This does not address the issue of is the photo of the correct person.
P I would take this as a given unless there is evidence otherwise
P (personal knowledge, etc.)
GS And what next a PGP (or GnuPG) signed picture with a signed key?
well,
Marck D Pearlstone, [MDP] wrote:
No. And I am currently looking Frank Dzicher's backside in the face
every time I get another rogue to approve. I'm not going to approve
the back view of Frank with his head between his knees clasping his
hands behind his thighs. Frank - if you don't want to
On Monday, July 12, 2004, at 15:15:51 [UTC-0700] (Monday, July 12, 2004
00:15 my local time) George Mitchell wrote:
JM [...] The only valid font styles should be: bold,
JM italics and underlined.
Please, no. I use the struckthrough attribute in a color group for
something else. Using colors
Thomas Fernandez, [TF] wrote:
Absolutely agree with it, and Allie recently posted a message asking
people to change the subject or create a new thread when bugs are
mentioned.
And I hope that without too much trouble, we'll be put out of our
longstanding and unusually well tolerated misery by
Hello Allie,
On Sunday, July 11, 2004, at 16:10:46[GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] (which was 14:10
where I live) Allie wrote:
Allie I've never come across this one. If I were, it would be worse than the
Allie focus change bug.
Allie This makes me wonder though if you're using any replied message
Allie
Dear Allie,
@11-Jul-2004, 17:56 -0500 (11-Jul 23:56 UK time) Allie Martin said
to Marck:
No. And I am currently looking Frank Dzicher's backside in the face
every time I get another rogue to approve. I'm not going to approve
the back view of Frank with his head between his knees clasping his
Hello Allie,
On Sunday, July 11, 2004, at 16:10:46[GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] (which was 14:10
where I live) Allie wrote:
Allie I've never come across this one. If I were, it would be worse than the
Allie focus change bug.
Allie This makes me wonder though if you're using any replied message
Allie
Zygmunt Wereszczynski wrote:
ZW Are you able to use strikeout font attribute in message list? I
ZW don't remember how it was in previous versions, but setting this
ZW attribute in TB 2.12 RC/3 does nothing for me.
Not in RC/3. It did work before.
ZW Is it a bug?
I hope so. 9Val indicated it
Hello Allie,
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:07:37 -0500 UTC, Allie Martin wrote:
AM I'm running one of those internal daily builds offered me to test new
AM IMAP functions. This one doesn't have the problem and it's a beta/8,
AM with executable file date July 8th 2004.
Yup. Same here. I'm back running
Hello Gary,
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:55:43 -0500 UTC, Gary wrote:
G Additionally, the IMAP RFC specifically calls for the term EXPUNGE, not
G purging, nor compressing. This IMO should be corrected in TB! when using an
G IMAP account, to differentiate, correctly so, from a POP3 setup.
Not only to
Hello Januk,
On Sunday, July 11, 2004, at 17:43:39[GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] (which was 17:43
where I live) Januk wrote:
Januk Because that's the way replied filters work. They act on the message
Januk *to which* you are replying, not on the message *with which* you are
Januk replying. It is a
Sunday, July 11, 2004, 5:53:21 PM, Kevin wrote:
KA I know we are talking about the same thing here and semantics are
KA getting in the way. Speaking to IMAP only, convention defines the act
KA of deletion as flagging a message for deletion on the server. The
KA message still physically exists on
Sunday, July 11, 2004, 7:39:44 PM, Charles wrote:
G Additionally, the IMAP RFC specifically calls for the term EXPUNGE, not
G purging, nor compressing. This IMO should be corrected in TB! when using an
G IMAP account, to differentiate, correctly so, from a POP3 setup.
CMG Not only to
On Sunday, July 11, 2004, 6:16 PM, you wrote:
PC we would need Batcon to verify photos with people:)
AW They certainly do a great job but what has batcon to do with verifying
AW photos?
oh whoops, I meant our bat-CON get-to-gether :) where we actually SEE
the people that are supposed to belong
33 matches
Mail list logo
