Freitag, 13. März 2009 at 18:01, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
> Do you use Voyager when you're outside? If so, do you mean you use the
> Dispatcher?
Yes, thats true, both.
--
With kind Regards
Jens Franik
mailto:je...@gmx.de
Picture of me? X-Rogue http://www.de2all.de/Kr_bat.jpg
The Bat! 4.1.11.6 m
Hallo Roelof,
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:52:51 +0100GMT (13-3-2009, 17:52 +0100, where I
live), you wrote:
RO> Tried to ignore TB in two separate ways:
Still cannot confirm after a third way
Rebooted
Started TB
Ate dinner
Visited my dad in the hospital
Watched a movie on the tele
Entered the master p
This is fixed and can close
https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=6464
--
Rick
You're only young once; you can be immature forever
v4.1.11.6 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Service Pack 3
Current beta is 4.1.11.6 | 'Using TBBETA' inform
Hi NetVicious,
on Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:38:49 +0100GMT (13.03.2009, 01:38 +0100GMT here),
you wrote:
N> Hi!
N> I detected from time ago a little but with OTFE master password
N> dialog.
N> If you open TB! and leave the master password dialog opened without
N> typing nothing for a minut
Hello Jens,
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:40:07 +0100 GMT (13/Mar/09, 23:40 +0700 GMT),
Jens Franik wrote:
TOP gets only Headers and RETR gets all, but you can limit the
Lines
>> I see. And why again would I need that in TheBat?
JF> It is more Fast - the first or the second way (i do
Hallo NetVicious,
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:38:49 +0100GMT (13-3-2009, 1:38 +0100, where I
live), you wrote:
N> If you open TB! and leave the master password dialog opened without
N> typing nothing for a minute or more, when you type your password and
N> TB! opens all the folder counts (read, n
Freitag, 13. März 2009 at 16:36, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
>>> TOP gets only Headers and RETR gets all, but you can limit the
>>> Lines
> I see. And why again would I need that in TheBat?
It is more Fast - the first or the second way (i dont know).
And you need it, while you start up the
Freitag, 13. März 2009 at 16:30, MAU wrote:
> As
> stated in HELP, "The header parameter (that I call here ) must be
> the RFC-name as defined in Options->Preferences->Message Headers.", And,
> for Date, the RFC name is Date, period. And you can't change that
> because that is the name define
Hello NetVicious,
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:38:49 +0100 GMT (13/Mar/09, 7:38 +0700 GMT),
NetVicious wrote:
N> I detected from time ago a little but with OTFE master password
N> dialog.
N> If you open TB! and leave the master password dialog opened without
N> typing nothing for a minute o
Hello MAU,
> ...sit in a put...
In a 'pub', of course.
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v4.1.11.6 on Windows XP 5.1 Service Pack 3
See some of my photos at http://www.Rancho-K.com
Current beta is
Hello NetVicious,
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:22:41 +0100 GMT (13/Mar/09, 6:22 +0700 GMT),
NetVicious wrote:
>> TOP gets only Headers and RETR gets all, but you can limit the
>> Lines
I see. And why again would I need that in TheBat?
>> as far as i remember my last Telenet to SMTP :-)
I tho
Hello Jens,
>> No, certainly not. Depending on how often one connects to 'get mail',
>> TB's received time may be even days later than last Received header.
>
> Ok, so you refer to
>
> ,- [ mid:1645315339.20090312175...@arcor.de ]
> | 4) The field "Received" should contain a date/time informa
Freitag, 13. März 2009 at 12:28, MAU wrote:
>> So i understood, that you claim about the Receive-Tag from The Bat!
>> not beeing equal with the last (in time line) Received: Header.
> No, certainly not. Depending on how often one connects to 'get mail',
> TB's received time may be even days lat
Hello Jens,
> So i understood, that you claim about the Receive-Tag from The Bat!
> not beeing equal with the last (in time line) Received: Header.
No, certainly not. Depending on how often one connects to 'get mail',
TB's received time may be even days later than last Received header.
--
Best
Freitag, 13. März 2009 at 11:40, MAU wrote:
> It is not a question of what received means for you or me. TB's Received
> time is NOT a header included in the message at all (see the source of
> any message)
Yes.
> and I was talking about Received: headers, which are well
> defined in RFCs.
But
Hello Jens,
> And of course, what is your expression for received - thats political
> i guess - for me received means the Mail is here at my Desk ready to
> read - for you maybe its enough to have the Mail received on the own
> Mailserver...
It is not a question of what received means for you or
Freitag, 13. März 2009 at 08:06, Marek Mikus wrote:
> stop punishing me, really!
Ok
> I have reported more than 1200 issues in Bugtraq
> since it exists
I would never tell that you did bad work - nerver ever.
I am pointing to your personal way to handle things, which troubles
me.
If necessar
Hello all,
Friday, March 13, 2009, Jens Franik wrote:
>> closing your duplicate Bugtraq issue is a critism? hmm
> No, not in this case, but normally you do critism on every little
> thing what others do - so this is meant as a hint for what you care
> and what you don't.
a) no, I have no time to
Hello all,
Friday, March 13, 2009, Jens Franik wrote:
>> Thats true, did you post this issue to this List?
> My Message Base is actual since 22 Jul 2008 and you did never post
> about this on this List, so why do you not post Problems which are (in
> your eyes) minor, but which affect others in s
19 matches
Mail list logo
