Hello Kevin,
Saturday, June 18, 2005, 11:45:37 PM, you wrote:
KC I suppose the account.* files could have been replaced one at a time
KC until the offending bugger was found. I ran out of ambition once the
KC problem was fixed. BTW, this new version loads fine also. Hopefully,
KC I'll never see
On 2005-06-18 (19:23), you wrote:
Did you have any backup?
Yes. I did. But this not the problem. :-/
What do you see in TB/MAIL directory?
Two 0 kB files with .dump extensions AFAIK.
Best regards, Krzysztof Kudacik
--
pb _, )\__/( ,_ Polska Strona Programu The Bat! |
On 2005-06-18 (17:14), you wrote:
I guess that means you're out of luck without a recent back-up.
When I saw firts crash of OS because of exiting TB! I started to collect
regular backups ;P And I was rightlucky.
Best regards, Krzysztof Kudacik
--
pb _, )\__/( ,_ Polska Strona
Hello Anatoly Steinpress everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 01:13 you (Anatoly Steinpress) wrote:
The only correct and user-friendly solution is a normal (good) installation
pack (msi, exe) which can install a new version without mistakes.
User friendly program must be very user friendly
Hello Avi Yashar everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 02:23 you (Avi Yashar) wrote:
My concern is that it makes little sense to have OTFE to maintain
security of your data base on one hand and have an uninstall option
that lets people uninstall that data base without the OTFE ID.
If *someone*
On 6/19/05, Alexander S. Kunz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My concern is that it makes little sense to have OTFE to maintain
security of your data base on one hand and have an uninstall option
that lets people uninstall that data base without the OTFE ID.
If *someone* lets people (that can't
Hello Avi,
I also observed that this concern is somewhat theoretical, because I
believe that this uninstall option does not work as advertised. :-q
I mentioned this behavior already with version v3.5.18.
? mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
BT: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4739
--
best
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Hendrik Oesterlin schrieb:
when I try to decrypt an inline encrypted message by clicking the
Decrypt button, a Save as dialogue opens instead of the passphrase
prompt. Worked ok in .26.
It works just fine here with TB!3.5.28 and PGP8.1 (both
On 6/19/05, Miroslav Florensen wrote:
I mentioned this behavior already with version v3.5.18.
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
BT: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4739
I have added a confirmation to your bt report and my own observation
about the *irony* of having an OTFE installation of TB
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
AY On 6/19/05, Miroslav Florensen wrote:
I mentioned this behavior already with version v3.5.18.
? mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
BT: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4739
AY I have added a confirmation to your bt report and my own
AY
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 00:29 h Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
The solution is in
MID:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Very fine, it works. - I found the
account.srb-file of one account that prevented The
Bat! from starting.
--
Best regards,
Maik
Difficile est longum subito deponere amorem.
Hello Goncalo Farias everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 12:56 you (Goncalo Farias) wrote:
If I recall, EVEN Microsoft asks for a password for their encrypted .pst
files :)
If you delete them? That would be interesting.
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
ASK Hello Goncalo Farias everyone else,
ASK on 19-Jun-2005 at 12:56 you (Goncalo Farias) wrote:
If I recall, EVEN Microsoft asks for a password for their encrypted .pst
files :)
ASK If you delete them? That would be interesting.
To remove them from
Hello Avi Yashar everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 09:43 you (Avi Yashar) wrote:
So are you saying that an application that can - and does - ask for a
password before opening up cannot also ask for a password before
uninstalling itself? Because if you are saying that, then I will have to
dig
Hello Maik Lehmberg everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 13:13 you (Maik Lehmberg) wrote:
Very fine, it works. - I found the account.srb-file of one account that
prevented The Bat! from starting.
Maxim has requested to send him those problematic files... would you do
that to help fix the issue?
Hello Peter Meyns everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 12:39 you (Peter Meyns) wrote:
So it doesn't seem to be a serious issue.
Nevertheless, I'd like to know why it happens. I looked at the two messages
you sent, and I can't make up any significant change, the only header that
is entirely
On Saturday, June 18, 2005, at 9:28:23 PM, Cees jumped on the stage,
took a mike and sang:
Folder - Maintenance, select all folders and all options still results in
an error stating: TProgressBar out of range. Whatever that means ;)
It means we're alpha testers, because the programmers
Hello Goncalo Farias everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 13:21 you (Goncalo Farias) wrote:
If I recall, EVEN Microsoft asks for a password for their encrypted
.pst files :)
ASK If you delete them? That would be interesting.
To remove them from outlook.
You can't access TB remove an OTFE
On Saturday, June 18, 2005 at 2:42:34 PM [GMT -0500], Allie_M wrote:
This could well be by design since it would solve the problem of not
being able to 'ignore' a mailbox. Without a header sync, the mailbox
counts are updated, but the list left unchanged, so that while browsing
from mailbox
On Saturday, June 18, 2005 at 7:22:00 AM [GMT -0500], Paul Van Noord
wrote:
I do not respect, or use, any software that removes user data upon
an uninstall. I cannot imagine a single circumstance where removing
the user's data with an uninstall would be positive. This should
always be a
On Saturday, June 18, 2005 at 12:58:27 PM [GMT -0500], Roelof Otten
wrote:
But every Windows user can have his/her own master password. On this
very pc, I have installed TB once (more would be silly), but when I'm
logging on with admin rights then I'm using a password protected
logon, so I
On Saturday, June 18, 2005 at 12:19:16 PM [GMT -0500], Avi Yashar wrote:
Suppose you're wanting to uninstall TB, but there are three Windows
accounts on the system, two with OTFE and one with plain. Would you
have the uninstall ask only for the OTFE password of the account being
used for the
On 6/19/05, Alexander S. Kunz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To remove them from outlook.
How about when you uninstall Outlook? Did you check that?
Alexander, pardon me, but it seems like you are dancing around the
point. Running the uninstall script of TB is the same as accessing TB
- it is like
6/19/2005 7:58 AM
Hi Avi,
On 6/19/2005 Avi Yashar wrote:
AY Alexander, one of the main reasons for encrypting a data base is
AY because others might get access to your computer for one reason or
AY another. Realistically speaking, these things happen; and, if I were a
AY betting man, I would
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 13:28 h Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
Maxim has requested to send him those
problematic files... would you do
that to help fix the issue?
I have already sended the file to Maxim (I read
his request).
--
Best regards,
Maik
Alteri semper ignoscito, tibi ipsi
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 7:03:34 AM [GMT -0500], Avi Yashar wrote:
Alexander, pardon me, but it seems like you are dancing around the
point. Running the uninstall script of TB is the same as accessing TB
- it is like being within TB. And so it makes no sense that TB will
ask for a password
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
ASK Hello Avi Yashar everyone else,
ASK on 19-Jun-2005 at 09:43 you (Avi Yashar) wrote:
So are you saying that an application that can - and does - ask for
a password before opening up cannot also ask for a password before
uninstalling itself?
On 6/19/05, Allie Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's possible to have TB! installed on a single machine that several
users log in to. Each could be using the same TB! installation. However,
they each use separate registry keys. One is using OTFE, while the
others aren't.
Okay, this much I
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
AM On Saturday, June 18, 2005 at 7:22:00 AM [GMT -0500], Paul Van Noord
AM wrote:
I do not respect, or use, any software that removes user data upon
an uninstall. I cannot imagine a single circumstance where removing
the user's data with an uninstall
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
AM I use a number of apps whose configuration can be passphrase protected.
AM These are anti-virus agents, firewalls, mailservers and such. Not one
AM have passphrase protected uninstall procedures, the reasoning being that
AM it's an administrator's action
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
AY Alexander, one of the main reasons for encrypting a data base is
AY because others might get access to your computer for one reason or
AY another. Realistically speaking, these things happen; and, if I were a
AY betting man, I would bet that they even
On 6/19/05, Goncalo Farias [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
AM On Saturday, June 18, 2005 at 7:22:00 AM [GMT -0500], Paul Van Noord
AM wrote:
I do not respect, or use, any software that removes user data upon
an uninstall. I cannot imagine a single
On 6/19/05, Goncalo Farias [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AY Alexander, one of the main reasons for encrypting a data base is
AY because others might get access to your computer for one reason or
AY another. Realistically speaking, these things happen; and, if I were a
AY betting man, I would bet
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 7:19:42 AM [GMT -0500], Avi Yashar wrote:
Okay, this much I understand. What I don't understand is how the OTFE
capability arose in the first place. Who installed TB with OTFE
capability and chose the master password?
As Roelof indicated earlier, deleting your
Hello Goncalo Farias everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 14:24 you (Goncalo Farias) wrote:
Symantec AV has a password to uninstall
Thats the corporate edition, installed in full managed mode. Why would the
end user in a corporate environment be allowed to fiddle with the AV,
anyway?
(you should
Het was op zondag 19 juni 2005 om 14:26 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'OTFE
Woes' :
Hallo Goncalo,
PVN You would lose your bet with me. I have management techniques that
PVN disallow physical access to my machines without permission.
GF How is that?
think!
he said phyical! access my
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 7:33:04 AM [GMT -0500], Avi Yashar wrote:
Goncalo, what is interesting here is that though there are different
views about what should be possible when running the uninstall script
for TB, everyone is agreeing - directly or indirectly - that the TB
uninstall script
Hello Goncalo Farias everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 14:19 you (Goncalo Farias) wrote:
Well, you may have more than one user with an administrative role in a
single computer.
An admin is an admin is an admin.
Given that there would be a scenario where you cannot trust the admin (and
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Meyns schrieb:
when I try to decrypt an inline encrypted message by clicking the
Decrypt button, a Save as dialogue opens instead of the passphrase
prompt. Worked ok in .26.
The problem was caused by contradictory HASH statements in
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 7:35:48 AM [GMT -0500], Allie_M wrote:
That's very different from multiple users logging into different XP
accounts and using TB!. They're using separate TB! configurations and
separate mail directories in separate locations. One could be using OTFE
encryption,
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
I do not respect, or use, any software that removes user data upon
an uninstall. I cannot imagine a single circumstance where removing
the user's data with an uninstall would be positive. This should
always be a purposeful and separate action from an
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
AY On 6/19/05, Goncalo Farias [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AY Alexander, one of the main reasons for encrypting a data base is
AY because others might get access to your computer for one reason or
AY another. Realistically speaking, these things happen; and,
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
AM On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 7:19:42 AM [GMT -0500], Avi Yashar wrote:
Okay, this much I understand. What I don't understand is how the
OTFE capability arose in the first place. Who installed TB with
OTFE capability and chose the master password?
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
Symantec AV has a password to uninstall
ASK Thats the corporate edition, installed in full managed mode. Why
ASK would the end user in a corporate environment be allowed to
ASK fiddle with the AV, anyway?
Maybe because the AV is interfering with
In reply to mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
ASK Hello Goncalo Farias everyone else,
ASK on 19-Jun-2005 at 14:19 you (Goncalo Farias) wrote:
Well, you may have more than one user with an administrative role in a
single computer.
ASK An admin is an admin is an admin.
ASK Given that there would
6/19/2005 9:20 AM
Hi Avi,
On 6/19/2005 Avi Yashar wrote:
How is that?
AY I just assumed it is body odor, Goncalo.
Ass/U/med. Isn't interesting that we usually assume the things that we
have experience with.
--
Take Care,
Paul
Never argue with a fool, people may not be able to tell who is
6/19/2005 9:10 AM
Hi Goncalo,
On 6/19/2005 Goncalo Farias wrote:
GF How is that?
If I told you everyone on this forum could have access.
--
Take Care,
Paul
Never argue with a fool, people may not be able to tell who is who.
The Bat! v.3.0.2.10 on Win2k SP4
Hello Goncalo Farias everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 15:10 you (Goncalo Farias) wrote:
ASK Given that there would be a scenario where you cannot trust the
ASK admin (and I wonder where that would be), would you store
ASK sensitive data on that computer?
Sometimes you just have to.
On 6/19/05, Allie Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 7:35:48 AM [GMT -0500], Allie_M wrote:
That's very different from multiple users logging into different XP
accounts and using TB!. They're using separate TB! configurations and
separate mail directories in
Hello Goncalo Farias everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 15:08 you (Goncalo Farias) wrote:
ASK Thats the corporate edition, installed in full managed mode. Why
ASK would the end user in a corporate environment be allowed to fiddle
ASK with the AV, anyway?
Maybe because the AV is interfering with
Hi Mark,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:44:50 +0200 (2:44 AM here), Mark Partous [MP]
wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
KC I suppose the account.* files could have been replaced one at a time
KC until the offending bugger was found
MP Because I did not spend too much time (thanks to your work), I did
Hi Maik,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 13:13:47 +0200 (7:13 AM here), Maik Lehmberg [ML]
wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The solution is in
MID:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ML Very fine, it works. - I found the account.srb-file of one account
ML that prevented The Bat! from starting.
It looks like we've found
Hello Roelof,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 07:58:00 +0200 GMT (19/06/2005, 12:58 +0700 GMT),
Roelof Otten wrote:
TF But there is a change I'll be in Amsterdam next month (not
TF confirmed yet), so maybe you'll improve with beers. LOL!
RO Keep me informed.
Will do.
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
If you have a
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 8:03:53 AM [GMT -0500], Goncalo Farias
wrote:
IMHO the requisites for OTFE should be reviewed. I see no benefit as
defined today.
None for you perhaps.
Again, IMHO, OTFE should be defined on an email account basis,
independently.
That's another issue
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 8:27:36 AM [GMT -0500], Avi Yashar wrote:
Allie, I am going to trust you on this one and defer to your generally
superior wisdom and your immense patience in sharing some of it with
me.
On this one, you can trust me because I've tried it personally.
I was not
Hello Daniel,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 01:47:29 +0200 GMT(6/18/2005, 6:47 PM -0600 GMT),
per mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Daniel Friedmann wrote:
Folder - Maintenance, select all folders and all options still
results in an error stating: TProgressBar out of range. Whatever
that means ;)
Confirmed.
Hello Greg,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 10:04:38 -0500 GMT (19/06/2005, 22:04 +0700 GMT),
Greg Strong wrote:
Folder - Maintenance, select all folders and all options still
results in an error stating: TProgressBar out of range. Whatever
that means ;)
Confirmed. These dozen popups are quite
Hi all,
I see that the customization panel includes message navigation shortcuts
for all the 'containers' in the main Window.
In this way, I've managed to configure 'n' to move me to the next unread
message no matter which part of the main window is in focus. When I just
started using 'n', I
Hello Tbbeta,
Thank you to all who localised the problem and sent me the ACCOUNT.SRB file.
[-] The Bat! 3.5.26 might not start
[-] Netscape certificate chain might not have been imported
[-] When exporting certificates to a CER file, an option to not export the
private key was ignored
Hello Thomas,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 22:21:05 +0700 GMT(6/19/2005, 10:21 AM -0600 GMT),
per mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thomas Fernandez wrote:
GS Confirmed!
Not confirmed over here.
GS Running maintenance with Check Integrity/Repair, Remove Duplicates,
GS Purge old/exceeding messages, Compress
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 10:54:01 AM [GMT -0500], Maxim Masiutin
wrote:
Even if you were using betas .26-.29 and it did start normally, you
should upgrade to .30.
Installed here and started Ok.
--
-= Allie Martin =-
The Bat!? v3.5.30
System Specs: http://www.ac-martin.com/sysspecs.htm
Hello Greg,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 11:05:34 -0500 GMT (19/06/2005, 23:05 +0700 GMT),
Greg Strong wrote:
GS I noticed the message is ONLY received on IMAP folders.
I have only POP accounts.
GS Do you run any IMAP accounts?
No. We have found an angle.
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
The most precious thing
I am actually reluctant to try this on my collection of 20,000 messages because
I am not sure that
TB isn't actually doing more harm than good. TB isn't even sure, within 1000
messages, how many there were. But as long as nothing is touched on the
server, I can always delete TB's message
This is one access violation I seem to be getting frequently
with TB! 3.5.29 when deleting messages:
---
The Bat!
---
Access violation at address 004045B4 in module 'thebat.exe'. Read of address
0349.
---
OK
Hello Maxim,
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:54:01 +0300 GMT (19/06/2005, 22:54 +0700 GMT),
Maxim Masiutin wrote:
MM Even if you were using betas .26-.29 and it did start
MM normally, you should upgrade to .30.
I obliged, and have no apparent problems.
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
Inhell Pentagram Pro 666:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Maxim,
on Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:54:01 +0300GMT (19.06.2005, 17:54 +0200GMT here),
you wrote:
MM Even if you were using betas .26-.29 and it did start
MM normally, you should upgrade to .30.
I did, and it still runs fine! :))
But I still can't
Hello Peter,
Sunday, June 19, 2005, 19:35:15, you wrote:
but sometimes, especially
after aborting a CC-task, I was unable to end TB and had to use the task
manager.
We didn't fix this.
--
Best regards,
Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sunday, June 19, 2005, 10:54:01 AM, (Internet Time - @704) you wrote:
Hello Maxim,
MM http://www.ritlabs.com/download/files3/the_bat/beta/tb3530.rar
MM Even if you were using betas .26-.29 and it did start
MM normally, you should upgrade to .30.
Up and running with no problems!
--
Best
Hey Maxim,
great work for now, thank you very much.
I know, I can be a real pain in the *ss, but what about some bugs I
mentioned weeks and months ago?
Connection Center appearance:
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(noticed in 3.5 RC5 or 6)
Visual (folder bars) / Remote Desktop / SMIME / Windows Server
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Martin,
on Sun, 19 Jun 2005 19:18:19 +0200GMT (19.06.2005, 19:18 +0200GMT here),
you wrote:
But I still can't sign the msg from within The Bat!... hmm
MS With GnuPG 1.4.1 ?
Right. No other than the primary UID of my key is accepted by The
Sunday, June 19, 2005, 10:32:50 AM, (Internet Time - @689) you wrote:
Hello Allie,
AM Hi all,
AM I see that the customization panel includes message navigation shortcuts
AM for all the 'containers' in the main Window.
AM In this way, I've managed to configure 'n' to move me to the next unread
Hello Martin,
Sunday, June 19, 2005, 20:20:06, you wrote:
Connection Center appearance:
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(noticed in 3.5 RC5 or 6)
Visual (folder bars) / Remote Desktop / SMIME / Windows Server 2003:
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(noticed in 3.0.9.19, S/MIME also in the first and early beta 3.x
Hello Martin,
Sunday, June 19, 2005, 20:26:58, you wrote:
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OK, but unfortunately I don't keep the archive, could you please submit them to
BT and send me the links?
--
Best regards,
Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Peter,
Sunday, June 19, 2005, 20:20:15, you wrote:
Do it - and I owe you one more nice cold german beer.
This is exactly what I like!
--
Best regards,
Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current
Hello Maxim!
On Sunday, June 19, 2005, 10:54 AM, you wrote:
http://www.ritlabs.com/download/files3/the_bat/beta/tb3530.rar
Even if you were using betas .26-.29 and it did start normally, you
should upgrade to .30.
Up and running. Fine thus far--as in .26-.29--in my normal pattern of
use.
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 11:52:55 AM [GMT -0500], Gleason Pace wrote:
How about making it possible for TB to delete its own databases within
the program?
Bring up the folder/mailbox properties and use the 'Delete cache'
option.
--
-= Allie Martin =-
The Bat!? v3.5.30
System Specs:
On Sunday, June 19, 2005 at 12:35:41 PM [GMT -0500], Michael Acklin
wrote:
Can you please let me know how you did this. I have looked everywhere
for the things you mentioned in your above message. I know exactly
what you are talking about as I use Mulberry sometimes and the N and
spacebar to
Hello Peter Hampf everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 19:20 you (Peter Hampf) wrote:
18-years old single malt? :-)
Whooops... for a moment I read maid instead of malt! LOL
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
Even the most overstuffed domestic cat demands a
Hello Thomas Fernandez everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 18:21 you (Thomas Fernandez) wrote:
GS Do you run any IMAP accounts?
No. We have found an angle.
Actually, it was already found in
msgid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
I don't
Hello Maxim Masiutin everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 17:54 you (Maxim Masiutin) wrote:
Even if you were using betas .26-.29 and it did start normally, you
should upgrade to .30.
Done that. No problem. Respect for the recent fixes. I mean... working on
Saturday Sunday... someone really
Martin Schoch [MS] wrote,
MS Started a complete maintenance for all folders - at the end of the
MS process I got these error messages.
Cannot confirm. Works a treat here.
--
Regards,
Ron Secord
Using TB! 3.5.30 Professional
Under Windows XP 5.1 Service Pack 2
Maxim Masiutin [MM] wrote,
http://www.ritlabs.com/download/files3/the_bat/beta/tb3530.rar
One (bug) thing that I have had for the whole 3.5.x series is that when
I have a message open in PTV, I hit F9 to view source and the view
source window position is not remembered, even though it is
Hello Martin Schoch everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 20:24 you (Martin Schoch) wrote:
Started a complete maintenance for all folders - at the end of the
process I got these error messages.
That issue is already known. It happens only with IMAP folders.
See mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Best
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin Schoch schrieb:
Right. No other than the primary UID of my key is accepted by The
Bat!. For all others I have to use GPGshell.
I added a second UID to this key I am using here...
When using the second UID to send a message the
Hello Maxim,
http://www.ritlabs.com/download/files3/the_bat/beta/tb3530.rar
Even if you were using betas .26-.29 and it did start normally, you should
upgrade to .30.
Up and running.
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v3.5.30 on Windows 2000 5.0
Hello Martin Schoch,
on Sunday, June 19, 2005 at you wrote:
Hi TBBETA
Started a complete maintenance for all folders - at the end of the
process I got these error messages.
See picture.
Neither I can confirm. Seems to be ok here.
--
Best regards,
Stefan Dorscht
Hello Martin Schoch everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 21:01 you (Martin Schoch) wrote:
That issue is already known. It happens only with IMAP folders.
See mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oh I see - and yes - in my accounts there is a IMAP folder...
What I don't know right now is if it is already
Hello Alexander,
someone really should get you a beer now, man.
I'll let them have half of those that some people owe me ;-)
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v3.5.30 on Windows 2000 5.0 Service Pack 4
Hello Ron!
On Sunday, June 19, 2005, 1:38 PM, you wrote:
One (bug) thing that I have had for the whole 3.5.x series is that when
I have a message open in PTV, I hit F9 to view source and the view
source window position is not remembered, even though it is checked
under View - Remember
On Sun 19-Jun-05 10:54am -0500, Maxim Masiutin wrote:
http://www.ritlabs.com/download/files3/the_bat/beta/tb3530.rar
Working fine but Watch Replies In is still not
working and the CC is still coming up in the background
when it should be in the foreground.
--
Best regards,
Bill
The Wounded
Mary Bull [MB] wrote,
Confirmed. Happens also with RTV. The shift in position is not
dramatic in the window-sizes and dimensions that I have defined, but
it's there.
The window sizes and dimensions don't seem to vary here. It's more the
position. Here the View Source window position varies
Hello Ron!
On Sunday, June 19, 2005, 2:53 PM, you wrote:
Confirmed. Happens also with RTV. The shift in position is not
dramatic in the window-sizes and dimensions that I have defined, but
it's there.
The window sizes and dimensions don't seem to vary here. ...
Oh, I didn't mean to say
On Sunday, June 19, 2005, 2:46:56 PM, Bill McCarthy wrote:
Working fine=Cannot find a quick template wrap2
I have deleted and re-downloaded 4 times now, and keep getting a very
small file 241,000 bytes, instead of 8 million.
--
Dwight A. Corrin
928 S Broadway
Wichita KS 67211
316.303.1411
Greetings BatPeople,
Sunday, June 19, 2005, 11:54:01 AM, Maxim wrote:
M Hello Tbbeta,
M Thank you to all who localised the problem and sent me the ACCOUNT.SRB file.
M [-] The Bat! 3.5.26 might not start
WOOHOO!!! back in sequence!! Many thanks
--
Cheers,
\\'
Message reply
Greg Strong wrotes on 20/06/2005 at 02:04:38 +1100
subject 3.5.29 :
Folder - Maintenance, select all folders and all options still
results in an error stating: TProgressBar out of range. Whatever
that means ;)
Confirmed. These dozen popups are quite annoying.
Confirmed!
Running
Hello Hendrik!
On Sunday, June 19, 2005, 3:14 PM, you wrote:
Greg Strong wrotes on 20/06/2005 at 02:04:38 +1100
subject 3.5.29 :
Folder - Maintenance, select all folders and all options still
results in an error stating: TProgressBar out of range. Whatever
that means ;)
Confirmed.
Hello Dwight A Corrin everyone else,
on 19-Jun-2005 at 22:13 you (Dwight A Corrin) wrote:
I have deleted and re-downloaded 4 times now, and keep getting a very
small file 241,000 bytes, instead of 8 million.
Proxy?
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
Hello Maxim,
Sunday, June 19, 2005, 5:54:01 PM, you wrote:
MM If the beta .26-.29 didn't start normally, please confirm that it now
starts OK
It does! :-)
--
Best Wishes,
Mark
using The Bat! Version 3.5.30 with
MyMacros 1.11
Universal Macro eXtender 2.4.1185
[Reply to: Maxim Masiutin 2005-06-19 17:54 h (CET)]
Hello, Maxim!
[-] The Bat! 3.5.26 might not start
If the beta .26-.29 didn't start normally, please confirm that it
now starts OK.
Yep, now The Bat! is running! :-)
--
Cheers!
VA - using The Bat! 3.5.30 (Pro) on Windows XP Service Pack
[Reply to: Volker Ahrendt 2005-06-04 23:40 h (CET)]
VAThere are *two* entries: Max [EMAIL PROTECTED]
VA Mller
Confirmed, and the message doesn't get sent. Reason: The second line
is interpreted as recipient Mller Mller (no quotes) which is not
a valid
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
