Hi Hal,
on Monday, December 13, 1999, 8:32:51 AM GMT+0800, Hal wrote:
H> X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.38e) S/N 17703E4C
TF>> Surprises me honestly. You sure you didn't have a typo, or mixed up
TF>> caps and lower-case?
H> After the second attempt (i.e. from the third on) I made sure and even had my
Hello Thomas,
Thursday, December 09, 1999, 10:09:28 PM, you wrote:
TF> Hi Hal,
TF> on Friday, December 10, 1999, 9:42:25 AM GMT+0800, Hal wrote:
H>> Registration code is rejected as not authentic. I just happened to be lucky and
had
H>> two computers to play with. When I bought this one (m
On Thursday, December 09, 1999, Ali Martin wrote:
> They fixed a couple problems between the 7th Dec release and the 8th
> Dec release. I don't know the specifics though.
I ended up downloading 2 files from different sources, I think, but
anyway, one of the files was dated November 20something,
On Thursday, December 09, 1999 Alexander V. Kiselev wrote:
> *.lng file is updated more often, it's just a part of Intpack. It
> contains *actual* string resources for the foreign languages
> supported (if you understand what I mena:-)). But you'll need
> Intpack itself to use *.lng file...
Yo
Friday, December 10, 1999
Hello Ali,
Thursday, Thursday, December 09, 1999, you wrote:
Ali>Douglas Hinds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ali> [...]
H>>> ...And your crybaby whiney-assed opinion would be?
>> To whom was that remark addressed?
Ali> That seemed to be just a Cookie. It was in the
Friday, December 10, 1999
Hello Mark,
Thursday, Thursday, December 09, 1999, you wrote:
Mark> Hi Douglas,
Mark> Thursday, December 09, 1999, 7:50:09 AM, you wrote:
DH>> What's THEBAT.LNG? A Linux / Gnu version?
Mark> If only.no it's The Bat's language pack, which allows you to
Mark
Hi Hal,
on Friday, December 10, 1999, 9:42:25 AM GMT+0800, Hal wrote:
H> Registration code is rejected as not authentic. I just happened to be lucky and had
H> two computers to play with. When I bought this one (my wife got the hand-me-down)
H> and installed The Bat for the first time, the reg
Hi Douglas,
on Friday, December 10, 1999, 5:25:34 AM GMT+0800, Douglas Hinds wrote:
TF>> ...Today I downloaded from the official site
TF>> ftp.ritlabs.com/pub/the_bat/the_bat.exe, ... On the beta site, you
TF>> get only the executable, whereas the official site has a
TF>> self-extracting file.
Hi Alexander,
on Friday, December 10, 1999, 6:14:28 AM GMT+0800, Alexander V. Kiselev wrote:
AVK> The size of Intpack is due to the number of foreign languaages
AVK> currently supported, it's growth in size is therefore inevitable
AVK> too.
True; it's getting bigger than The Bat! itself. I un
Hello Douglas,
Thursday, December 09, 1999, 2:59:07 AM, you wrote:
DH> Hello Hal & all fellow TBUDL members,
DH> Wednesday, December 08, 1999, 8:05:48 PM, Hal wrote:
H>> Hello Douglas,
DH>
H>> ...And your crybaby whiney-assed opinion would be?
DH> To whom was that remark addressed?
DH>
Hello Thomas,
Wednesday, December 08, 1999, 10:55:48 PM, you wrote:
TF> Hi Hal,
TF> on Thursday, December 09, 1999, 10:05:48 AM GMT+0800, Hal wrote:
N Would like to know if I can upgrade my registered version 1.35 to
N 1.36 without a problem.
DH>>> I would think so. I did.
H>> BUT w
Hi there!
On 9 Dec 99, at 15:25, Douglas Hinds wrote
about "Re[6]: Upgrading, backuping/restori":
> TF> ...Today I downloaded from the official site
> TF> ftp.ritlabs.com/pub/the_bat/the_bat.exe, ... On the beta site, you
> TF> get only the executable, whereas the official site has a
> TF> s
Hello Thomas & all fellow TBUDL members,
Thursday, December 09, 1999, Thomas wrote:
TF> ...Today I downloaded from the official site
TF> ftp.ritlabs.com/pub/the_bat/the_bat.exe, ... On the beta site, you
TF> get only the executable, whereas the official site has a
TF> self-extracting file.
Do
Hello Mark,
Thursday, December 09, 1999, 3:21:19 AM, you wrote in response to my saying:
DH>> What's THEBAT.LNG? A Linux / Gnu version?
MA> If only.no
I'm told one's in the works.
MA> it's The Bat's language pack, which allows you to
MA> change the interface language.
Thanks. I use
Hi Douglas,
Thursday, December 09, 1999, 7:50:09 AM, you wrote:
DH> What's THEBAT.LNG? A Linux / Gnu version?
If only.no it's The Bat's language pack, which allows you to
change the interface language.
--
Best regards,
Mark
Using The Bat! 1.38
under Windows 98 4 10 Build 1998
-
Hi Douglas,
on Thursday, December 09, 1999, 4:04:25 PM GMT+0800, Douglas Hinds wrote:
TF>> I have jsut downloaded the third official version of 1.38...
DH> Third? I'm downloading now from:
DH> http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/beta.html
DH> And the site says: Download The Bat! 1.38 Release secon
Douglas Hinds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
H>> ...And your crybaby whiney-assed opinion would be?
> To whom was that remark addressed?
That seemed to be just a Cookie. It was in the signature.
--
Ali Martin | Using The Bat! v1.38
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Douglas Hinds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
TF>> I have jsut downloaded the third official version of 1.38...
> Third? I'm downloading now from:
> http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/beta.html
> And the site says: Download The Bat! 1.38 Release second revision
> Am I at the wrong site or is the te
Hello Thomas & all fellow TBUDL members,
Thursday, December 09, 1999, 12:57:51 AM, Thomas wrote:
TF> I have jsut downloaded the third official version of 1.38...
Third? I'm downloading now from:
http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/beta.html
And the site says: Download The Bat! 1.38 Release second
Hello Hal & all fellow TBUDL members,
Wednesday, December 08, 1999, 8:05:48 PM, Hal wrote:
H> Hello Douglas,
H> ...And your crybaby whiney-assed opinion would be?
To whom was that remark addressed?
Douglas Hinds
--
--
View the T
Hello Ali & all fellow TBUDL members,
Thursday, December 09, 1999, Ali wrote in response to my saying:
>> I download and installed v. 1.38 (apparently not a beta) yesterday,
>> Dec. seventh from the ritlabs beta site. Was a revision uploaded on the
>> eighth or do I have the latest one?
AM> Th
Hi Stefan,
on Thursday, December 09, 1999, 3:49:47 AM GMT+0800, Stefan Tanurkov wrote:
ST> This is fixed in the today's revision of 1.38. Please feel free to
ST> download it :-)
I have jsut downloaded the third official version of 1.38 - should we
mention download date and when when we report a
Douglas Hinds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I download and installed v. 1.38 (apparently not a beta) yesterday,
> Dec. seventh from the ritlabs beta site. Was a revision uploaded on the
> eighth or do I have the latest one?
They fixed a couple problems between the 7th Dec release and the
toring,
ST> account folder structure (was: Re: Upgrade 1.35 > 1.36)
ST> This is fixed in the today's revision of 1.38. Please feel free to
ST> download it :-)
I download and installed v. 1.38 (apparently not a beta) yesterday,
Dec. seventh from the ritlabs beta site. Was a r
Thursday, December 09, 1999
Hello Hal,
Thursday, Thursday, December 09, 1999, you wrote:
Hal> Hello Douglas,
Hal> Tuesday, December 07, 1999, 10:48:03 PM, you wrote:
DH>> Tuesday, December 07, 1999, NDS8nz wrote:
N>>> Would like to know if I can upgrade my registered version 1.35 to
N>>> 1
Hi Hal,
on Thursday, December 09, 1999, 10:05:48 AM GMT+0800, Hal wrote:
N>>> Would like to know if I can upgrade my registered version 1.35 to
N>>> 1.36 without a problem.
DH>> I would think so. I did.
H> BUT when I uninstall The Bat and reinstall (i.e. reformatting) I can't manually
enter
H
Hello Douglas,
Tuesday, December 07, 1999, 10:48:03 PM, you wrote:
DH> Tuesday, December 07, 1999, NDS8nz wrote:
N>> Would like to know if I can upgrade my registered version 1.35 to
N>> 1.36 without a problem.
DH> I would think so. I did.
DH> DH
BUT when I uninstall The Bat and reinstall
Dear Christopher,
CJT> OK, testing done. It seems that qtp and fld aren't needed, but srt
CJT> needs to be there even if it is only a zero-byte file...
This is fixed in the today's revision of 1.38. Please feel free to
download it :-)
Sincerely,
Stefan
..."It is neither wealt
> I'm not sure if you can delete files *.srt, *.qtp *.fld when you have
> corresponding *.srx *.qtn *.flx... Maybe I'll test it later...
OK, testing done. It seems that qtp and fld aren't needed, but srt
needs to be there even if it is only a zero-byte file...
--
Christopher J. Trybowski
On Wednesday, December 08, 1999 NDS8nz wrote:
> Would like to know if I can upgrade my registered version 1.35 to
> 1.36 without a problem.
Sure you can. You can either download only the executable file or the
whole distribution (in 1.38 help file is also upgraded!). You can
safely re-i
Tuesday, December 07, 1999, NDS8nz wrote:
N> Would like to know if I can upgrade my registered version 1.35 to
N> 1.36 without a problem.
I would think so. I did.
DH
--
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To
Hi NDS8nz,
on Wednesday, December 08, 1999, 9:57:24 AM GMT+0800, NDS8nz wrote:
N> Would like to know if I can upgrade my registered version 1.35 to 1.36 without a
N> problem.
N> Thanks,
N> Lars O. Brouwer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is absolutely no problem. Just pu
Good morning,
Would like to know if I can upgrade my registered version 1.35 to 1.36 without a
problem.
Thanks,
Lars O. Brouwer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All
33 matches
Mail list logo
