On Mon, 2002-09-23 at 06:23, Eric Lambart wrote: > On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 22:50, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 09:08, Not Zed wrote: > > > if you add received date, you may as well just get all headers. i > > > reckon on average it'll be smaller (received is normally the biggest > > > chunk downloaded from the server). > > > > Yea, I know :\ > > > > > > > > also, you could just fudge it and make received == date. > > > > thought about doing this, maybe this is what we should do. > > That would be totally inaccurate, would it not?
Its not guaranteed to be accurate anyway. Its based on what should be the last received date added by the last server to process it. > Anyway, I for one have always wanted the Received Date to work, and it > has NEVER worked all the way back to Evo 0.10.99 or so, for me. Most of > the messages have "?" so it was always useless. I was always using POP > before, now I am converting to IMAP and would certainly want it to work > there. > > It gets really frustrating that Evolution can't ever get the Received > date right on about 40 percent of the messages I receive. It makes the > whole column totally useless to me, since I can't sort by date Received > (all the ? marks go to one end). Did you ever submit a bug report, with example messages? I've never seen this happen. > This seems to be a parsing problem of some sort, because it depends on > the sender of the message. Whether the sender's SMTP server is borked > or not, it's reality. FWIW all messages from the Evolution List have > "Received" headers that are properly parsed by Evolution. > > Here we go with that old line again: "it has worked well in almost every > other mailer I've used" =) _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
