Re[2]: Access violation when moving folders for rules

2004-10-24 Thread finalcut
Hello Anthony G. Atkielski On 24.October.2004, 1:50 AM (Now: 24.October.2004, 8:54 PM), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It didn't work for the shuttle. AGA It did work for the shuttle; but someone decided to skip a few steps. lol -- The Final Cut [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thebat: 3.0.2.1

Re[2]: Access violation when moving folders for rules

2004-10-21 Thread Charles Canato
Wednesday, October 20, 2004, 7:03:18 PM, you wrote: AGA When I create a new rule and try to move it with Alt and the mouse, if I AGA slip it downwards instead of upwards, I usually get an access violation, AGA like the message attached. Access violations then occur each time I try AGA to edit

Re[2]: Access violation when moving folders for rules

2004-10-20 Thread finalcut
Hello Alexander S. Kunz On 20.October.2004, 4:19 PM (Now: 20.October.2004, 4:21 PM), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ASK Ahem... Anthony is using 3.0.1.33 which *is* the latest stable release ASK version, the only more recent version is 3.0.2.1 (which is a beta), and the ASK stability of that release

Re[2]: Access violation when moving folders for rules

2004-10-20 Thread Martin Webster
Michael Wilson [MLW], wrote: AGA When I create a new rule and try to move it with Alt and the mouse, if I AGA slip it downwards instead of upwards, I usually get an access violation, AGA like the message attached. Access violations then occur each time I try AGA to edit the filters, until I

Re[2]: Access Violation

2004-06-13 Thread Tony
Hello Bill, BM On Sun 13-Jun-04 1:56am -0500, Tony wrote: The MapQuest url opens fine here... Could it be that the browser the remote location chokes on the URL? BM Thanks for checking, Tony. Both locations are using I.E. 6. The odd BM thing is that the failure is occurring on my laptop

Re[2]: Access Violation

2004-06-13 Thread Tony
Hello Melissa, MR Hi Tony, MR On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 12:54:48 AM PST, you wrote: I assume TB! uses MSIE' engine to render the pages; so maybe that conficts..? MR Eek! Please don't assume such a horrible thing! :-) One of TB!'s many MR strengths is that it uses its own HTML rendering

Re[2]: Access Violation

2004-06-13 Thread Tony
Hello Roelof, . T It makes me wonder why TB! doesn't fully render HTML then. T I mean the HTML with little red crosses where pictures should be. RO Generally that's because the pictures aren't sent with the message. TB RO only shows attached pictures. T I remember something written about

Re[2]: Access Violation

2004-06-13 Thread Tony
Hello Thomas, TF Hello Tony, TF On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 12:10:24 +0200 GMT (13/06/2004, 17:10 +0700 GMT), TF Tony wrote: T Many people are on always-on connections nowadays TF What makes you say that? I know *nobody* who is always on at home over TF here, and only *some companies* who can afford

Re[2]: Access Violation

2004-06-13 Thread Tony
Hello Allie, AM Tony, [T] wrote: Maybe we are talking about different things? Almost all people I know are on ADSL/SDSL/Cable. Much cheaper then dail-up. ADSL is a booming market here. AM :) All the people I know around me speak English. AM I was in Japan a couple years ago and met people

Re[2]: Access Violation

2004-06-13 Thread Tony
Hello Thomas, . TF We are talking about different countries. I'm from the Netherlands. Quite average if I speak to my Scandinavian friends with their 10 and even 100 mbit home connections. T Almost all people I know are on ADSL/SDSL/Cable. TF I knew you were talking about broadband. So was I.

Re[2]: Access Violation

2004-06-13 Thread Tony
Hello Allie, AM Tony, [T] wrote: Now you are mainly talking about spam I think? I tackle spam by other means. AM The let them come approach? Not really. When I expressed my wish for HTML rendering it surely wasn't for opening spam. K9 scans my e-mail for spam even before it enters my e-mail

Re[2]: Access Violation

2004-06-13 Thread Tony
Hello Julian, JBL On Sunday, June 13, 2004, 1:59:34 PM, Allie Martin wrote: Ok. Your not confirming hastened my efforts to check further. I changed my default browser from Netcaptor to Opera and it works now. JBL Is the problem with Message.html attachments that you open directly JBL from TB

Re[2]: Access violation in Account - Properties

2003-09-12 Thread Wilfried Mestdagh
Hello Mark, MW While we're on the subject, how about Folder | Maintenance | Check MW Integrity/Repair? That's cleared up some stuff for me before. tryed it. All folders: 'nothing to do'. I think I will try with a fresh installation when I have a moment of time -- Rgds, Wilfried

Re[2]: Access violation in Account - Properties

2003-09-12 Thread Wilfried Mestdagh
Hello Alexander, A If I were you, I'd rather make a backup with the internal backup utility, A completely remove TB, and then do a fresh re-install, restoring the backup. Made a backup copy, uninstalled the bat completely including registry key's, removed folder and did fresh install of

Re[2]: Access violation in Account - Properties

2003-09-11 Thread Wilfried Mestdagh
Hello Mark, MW remember NT 4.0 very well, but maybe it's worth trying to restore this MW file from the CAB files? I did but is same result. MW Also, regarding the beta version you installed... was that a version 2 MW or 1.6x? It was a 1.6x beta. And then I recall the first AV started

Re[2]: Access violation in Account - Properties

2003-09-11 Thread Wilfried Mestdagh
Hello Alexander, A Since purge+compress has proven now and then to be a cure for many A problems, have you tried that? (purge+compress all folders, I mean). Just tryed it, but in most folders it say 'nothing to do' as I have setup all my folders to cleanup on exit. Result is still same...

Re[2]: Access violation in Account - Properties

2003-09-11 Thread Wilfried Mestdagh
Hello Alexander, A If I were you, I'd rather make a backup with the internal backup utility, A completely remove TB, and then do a fresh re-install, restoring the backup. Ok thanks. It is a pretty that I dont know exact meaning and content of some files. I see there is data and index and

Re[2]: Access violation in Account - Properties

2003-09-11 Thread Wilfried Mestdagh
Hello Alexander, A If I were you, I'd rather make a backup with the internal backup utility, A completely remove TB, and then do a fresh re-install, restoring the backup. while I agree completely with your advice there is something to concider: suppose (probably) it works then, nobody will

Re[2]: Access Violation in xxxxx ?

2003-02-06 Thread telepro
Hello jwayne, Thursday, February 6, 2003, 4:41:10 PM, you wrote: On Thursday, February 6, 2003, 12:22:02 AM, telepro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I get access violations frequently when starting up TB and have for quite a while. As you said, it doesn't affect the operation of the program (other

Re[2]: Access Violation in xxxxx ?

2003-02-06 Thread telepro
Hello Spike, Thursday, February 6, 2003, 1:18:27 PM, you wrote: This usually happens when a mail folder (messages.tbb) gets larger than 2GB. This exceeds the FAT32 file size limit. You'll find that some mail folder can no longer accept new messages too! Just happened (again) to me on

Re[2]: Access Violation in xxxxx ?

2003-02-06 Thread telepro
Hello Thomas, Are you sure teh AV was caused by TB? Yes, absolutely ! What is the exact wording, which you have left out? I don't remember, but a dialog box of the bat indicating : access violation to the adress , the next time I have it,i note ! -- Best regards, Christophe