Re: Updated to 2.0.14
wingspan2 wrote: Hello everyone, Well I logged onto my Sea Monkey browser as usual and when my browser appeared, it had automatically updated to Sea Monkey 2.0.14. It looked a bit different but everything appeared to be there. But.. when I went to use my e-mail that Sea Monkey provides, I was unable to to send any messages. I was able to receive them just not able to send them. I called my internet provider "Comcast" to aid me with this problem, but they no longer help with browsers other than their own. I went through all the setting and every thing was still the same, but it will not send. I get this email message stating when I attempt to send it: "Cannot send message using the server Smtp.comcast.net:wingspan2..Use the pop-up menu below to try a different outgoing mail server. All messages will use this server until you quit Mail or change your network settings" So my wife and I tried different options that appeared in the drop down box, but none were able to make the out going mail work. Has anyone had this problem or know how to repair so our email can be sent again? Thanks in advance, Rob Last time i had that problem (with a different email client though), i had to delete all existing OGMS, restart the client, and setup the OGMS again from scratch. worked a treat after that. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Firefox is breaking my heart...sort of
Just a rave I thought some people here may be interested in. Linux and Open Source http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1689&tag=nl.e011 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 1.1.18 or 2.x ?? (curious)
MCBastos wrote:
Interviewed by CNN on 2/2/2010 12:30, Phillip Jones told the world:
I really hope HJ gets inspired enough to do the migration. He is
the _true father of tabbed browsing_ . So we all owe him a debt of
gratitude.
So, 1.1.18 it is then. :-/
ahh so that's the rascal that's responsible.
Well, not quite. The concept of a tabbed interface apparently came from
IBM, as part of their CUA project. The first browser with something
similar to modern tabs was a development version of Opera. But they
kinda sat on it for a while, the feature was not very well known -- it
only came to their mainstream browser after others had reinvented it
independently.
Then, there was Netcaptor, which was a front-end for the IE engine,
that brought it to the general public. A couple others (including Opera)
followed suit.
HJ, the author of Multizilla, was the one who brought it to the Mozilla
project -- in the form of an extension. Dave Hyatt saw it, liked it, and
wrote his own implementation (not taken from Multizilla) for the trunk
Mozilla browser.
So, if you want someone to "blame" (I personally would "thank"), there's
quite a bunch of people. The guys at IBM and Opera for creating it, the
guys at Netcaptor for spreading it around, HJ for showing it could work
in a Mozilla product or Dave Hyatt for making it a core feature.
lol, well good on them all then! But especially HJ. :) The suite
was the first place I came across tabs, years before IE ever had
them. I guess that was 2002. And Multizilla was one of the first
extensions I tried. Been using it ever since.
On a slightly different note. Is anyone else that's still using SM
1.1.18 having trouble with chat in facebook (FB)? It always give
the error message: Facebook Chat Error
Could not connect to Facebook Chat at this time.
Also on FB, the top "status update" ("write something") text box.
I click in it and the mouse pointer changes to a text pointer, the
box gets a bit larger, but no cursor appears, and I can't type
anything in the box. The "attach" links work though. As does
everything else on FB.
It all works fine with Google Chrome.
Suggestions anyone? (besides updating to 2.x that is! :) )
Cheers.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 1.1.18 or 2.x ?? (curious)
MCBastos wrote: Interviewed by CNN on 1/2/2010 00:00, Phillip Jones told the world: Most Banks don't accept any and browser that has a version number of Version 1.x on anything. My bank Suntrust said the didn't accept a version one of any browser. I change the the user agent to add /not FireFox 2.0 would work just fine. As soon as I switched to SM I didn't have to use the altered UA string. I don't believe that to be the case. The site didn't refuse Seamonkey outright, but some essential features (like the on-screen keyboard used for logging on) simply didn't work. Try MrTech Extension and see if Multizalla works with forced compatibility. No, Multizilla is too big and complex -- it doesn't just add a localized feature, it replaces a large part of Seamonkey's UI. There's just too many places where it hooks into the old XPFE toolkit. The author was working on a Toolkit (Suiterunner) build, but he doesn't have much time for the project these days, so it is essentially stalled for the time being. I even tested the Suiterunner build a few months ago, but it's still too broken to be usable. I'm sorry to hear that Multizilla wont work in SM2.x, it's my favourite extension. If I have to drop it, I'll have to spend quite some time setting up preferences from scratch. It's literally years since I've has to do that. I really hope HJ gets inspired enough to do the migration. He is the true father of tabbed browsing. So we all owe him a debt of gratitude. So, 1.1.18 it is then. :-/ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: 1.1.18 or 2.x ?? (curious)
Mike C wrote: I'm sticking with v1.1.18 because of the add ons (mainly RoboForm). I'd be curious to see how many of you are also sticking with v1.1.18 for the time being. Reasons?? I'm sticking with v1.1.18 for now at least. Because of the add ons, mainly MultiZilla, which (btw Lee) gives you an extension manager among lots of other things. I have tried 2.x on a few occasions, but each time within a day, I've done a system restore to a point just before the 2.x install. I lose too many settings and options that (as far as could find), only MZ provides. FF/TB is on all our other systems. Not that I use any of them very often, but my better half does. Maybe I'll have another look after a few more 2.x versions have been released. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Importing multible identites in SM 2.X.
Martin Freitag wrote: Nairda schrieb: If I just installed the SM2 browser component, could I continue using the rest of my SM1.18 apps, Without losing access to my old 1.18 profiles? Or is this a really bad idea? (: You can install SM2 safely to a folder like Seamonkey2 besides your old SM1.1.x SM2 migrates your profile data to a _new_ profile in another directory. So you can use any Seamonkey at any time. Just make sure to add the -no-remote parameter in the shortcut to SM2 if you need to start/run both Seamonkeys at the same time. regards Martin Thank you Martin! Will do. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Importing multible identites in SM 2.X.
David Wilkinson wrote: Nairda wrote: Yes, they can, and extra profiles and dictionaries can be restored. Given the time and inclination. But some really serious security hole(s) are going to have to be found in SM1.1.18 first. (: For me it is the browser compatibility that will get me to move. Too many sites do not display correctly in FireFox 2.x/SeaMonkey 1.x these days. For now I am still using 1.18 on my main (XP) machine. But it's only a matter of time. The only site I have any trouble with what so ever is face book. SM1.18 wont let me add text into some text fields. The cursor just wont appear in the field. So not even ctrl+c, ctrl+v (MS global copy and paste keyboard shortcuts, great for when right clicks wont work) will work. Which is about the only time I ever open g00gle chr0me. A small price to pay to be able to continue using my favourite internet suite. I don't much like changing default instillation folders. Otherwise I would just run 1x and 2x in parallel. Until such time as I am satisfied with 2x. I managed it with the actual program shortcuts by having two, with one pointing back to 1.18. But couldn't figure out how to do the same for the profile managers. I know this isn't the soundest of practices, but with a little care, no problems are caused. If I just installed the SM2 browser component, could I continue using the rest of my SM1.18 apps, Without losing access to my old 1.18 profiles? Or is this a really bad idea? (: ~n ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SMTP parameter in SM2 after having migrated from SM1
obones wrote: Hello all, I'm currently reviewing SM2 and when I installed it I told it to import the settings from my existing SM1 installation. All email accounts got imported, along with the SMTP server definition. While I can send emails just fine in SM1, I always get an error when sending emails with SM2. The error says this: Unable to authenticate to SMTP server SERVER_NAME. The serer does not support any compatible insecure authentication mechanism but you have chosen insecure authentication. Try switching on secure authentication or contact your service provider. I tried turning on TLS or even SSL, but none of these are provided by the given server. What I find weird is that it worked and continues to work fine in SM1. Obviously, some option has been removed/disabled in SM2, but which one? Is there a way to reactivate it? Thanks It's a known bug, you have to disable secure authentication. It even says so on the SM2 page that loads after the initial installation. It's Under "known issues" or whatever. I don't know why this preference was changed. It never used to be enabled in previous versions. But you got to love these guys, they work their guts out for us all, for very little thanks or recognition. Even with my "Importing multiple SM 1.x identities into SM2" migration blues, I still think they have done an amazing job. Anyway, this should do the trick for you. Edit>Preferences>Server Settings>un-check "use secure authentication" HTH Happy webing. (: ~n ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Importing multible identites in SM 2.X.
Leonidas Jones wrote: Nairda wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Nairda wrote: Nairda wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Nairda wrote: Hay gang. Nice work with SM 2.0. So how many versions of SM 2.X will it be before we can import multiple identities with out having to do the extra ones manually? If you planning on waiting, it will be a long wait. I don't think it will ever be available. Lee Thanks for your reply Lee. In that case I think I will wait till MozBackup 1.4.10 comes out of Beta. When ever that will be. (: Mozbackup 1.4.9 claims to work with SeaMonkey 1.0a - 2.0. Has anyone tried it with SM 2.0 yet? ~N OK, well I tried it, and MB 1.4.9 only finds SM2 and SM2 profiles after SM2 has been installed. SM2 doesn't even seem to import your old settings from the one single profile that it does let you import. It took me ages to get things just the way I wanted them, and it looks like one update blows them all away. SM2 may be better, faster, and easier for some, but until the profile migration is fixed (which as Lee says maybe never), I guess I'm sticking with 1.1.18 for the foreseeable future. All the best to everyone here. ~N Moz Backup is Windows only, so I have no direct knowledge of it. However, your description seems consistent with how it should work. Remember, it is backup tool, its not designed for profile migration. You can invoke the migration wizard manually, to migrate other profiles: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile_migration_-_SeaMonkey#Manual_migration Lee Yes I did look at that once or twice, but it all seemed rather convoluted. And it still begs to question, why don't settings seem to stick? Like clicking a link in all my old profiles opened a new tab, not a whole new window. Or maybe that was part of what I used MultiZilla for. Which of course would have to be reinstalled and re-setup from scratch I guess. http://multizilla.mozdev.org/features/index.html I will have another go at the migration when I get more time. Thanks for all your help Lee. ~N Sad to say, Multizilla is not compatible with SM 2.0. It is a hobby extension, so there is no saying when or if it will ever be ported over. As far as settings, most of mine did seem to carry over, but it is a totally different program. They can be reset easily enough in Preferences. Lee Yes, they can, and extra profiles and dictionaries can be restored. Given the time and inclination. But some really serious security hole(s) are going to have to be found in SM1.1.18 first. (: Shame about Multizilla though. Been using it for many years. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Importing multible identites in SM 2.X.
Leonidas Jones wrote: Nairda wrote: Nairda wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Nairda wrote: Hay gang. Nice work with SM 2.0. So how many versions of SM 2.X will it be before we can import multiple identities with out having to do the extra ones manually? If you planning on waiting, it will be a long wait. I don't think it will ever be available. Lee Thanks for your reply Lee. In that case I think I will wait till MozBackup 1.4.10 comes out of Beta. When ever that will be. (: Mozbackup 1.4.9 claims to work with SeaMonkey 1.0a - 2.0. Has anyone tried it with SM 2.0 yet? ~N OK, well I tried it, and MB 1.4.9 only finds SM2 and SM2 profiles after SM2 has been installed. SM2 doesn't even seem to import your old settings from the one single profile that it does let you import. It took me ages to get things just the way I wanted them, and it looks like one update blows them all away. SM2 may be better, faster, and easier for some, but until the profile migration is fixed (which as Lee says maybe never), I guess I'm sticking with 1.1.18 for the foreseeable future. All the best to everyone here. ~N Moz Backup is Windows only, so I have no direct knowledge of it. However, your description seems consistent with how it should work. Remember, it is backup tool, its not designed for profile migration. You can invoke the migration wizard manually, to migrate other profiles: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile_migration_-_SeaMonkey#Manual_migration Lee Yes I did look at that once or twice, but it all seemed rather convoluted. And it still begs to question, why don't settings seem to stick? Like clicking a link in all my old profiles opened a new tab, not a whole new window. Or maybe that was part of what I used MultiZilla for. Which of course would have to be reinstalled and re-setup from scratch I guess. http://multizilla.mozdev.org/features/index.html I will have another go at the migration when I get more time. Thanks for all your help Lee. ~N ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Importing multible identites in SM 2.X.
Nairda wrote: Leonidas Jones wrote: Nairda wrote: Hay gang. Nice work with SM 2.0. So how many versions of SM 2.X will it be before we can import multiple identities with out having to do the extra ones manually? If you planning on waiting, it will be a long wait. I don't think it will ever be available. Lee Thanks for your reply Lee. In that case I think I will wait till MozBackup 1.4.10 comes out of Beta. When ever that will be. (: Mozbackup 1.4.9 claims to work with SeaMonkey 1.0a - 2.0. Has anyone tried it with SM 2.0 yet? ~N OK, well I tried it, and MB 1.4.9 only finds SM2 and SM2 profiles after SM2 has been installed. SM2 doesn't even seem to import your old settings from the one single profile that it does let you import. It took me ages to get things just the way I wanted them, and it looks like one update blows them all away. SM2 may be better, faster, and easier for some, but until the profile migration is fixed (which as Lee says maybe never), I guess I'm sticking with 1.1.18 for the foreseeable future. All the best to everyone here. ~N ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Importing multible identites in SM 2.X.
Leonidas Jones wrote: Nairda wrote: Hay gang. Nice work with SM 2.0. So how many versions of SM 2.X will it be before we can import multiple identities with out having to do the extra ones manually? If you planning on waiting, it will be a long wait. I don't think it will ever be available. Lee Thanks for your reply Lee. In that case I think I will wait till MozBackup 1.4.10 comes out of Beta. When ever that will be. (: Mozbackup 1.4.9 claims to work with SeaMonkey 1.0a - 2.0. Has anyone tried it with SM 2.0 yet? ~N ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Importing multible identites in SM 2.X.
Hay gang. Nice work with SM 2.0. So how many versions of SM 2.X will it be before we can import multiple identities with out having to do the extra ones manually? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability
»Q« wrote: In <news:brsdnaea4pknukpxnz2dnuvz_vqdn...@mozilla.org>, Nairda wrote: http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=1716&tag=nl.e011 Snip: "We added this support at the machine level in order to enable the feature for all users on the machine. Seems reasonable right? Well, turns out that enabling this functionality at the machine level, rather than at the user level means that the “Uninstall” button is grayed out in the Firefox Add-ons menu because standard users are not permitted to uninstall machine-level components." Irresponsible journalism, all too typical in the tech press. The techrepublic guy is quoting Brad Abrams' blog entry, <http://blogs.msdn.com/brada/archive/2009/02/27/uninstalling-the-clickonce-support-for-firefox.aspx>, but he neglected to quote this part: Update (5/2009): We just release an update to .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 that makes the firefox plug in a per-user component. This makes uninstall a LOT cleaner.. none of the steps below are required once this update is installed. That update was made to the blog *before* the techreport article was posted. No browser, including Firefox and SeaMonkey, can protect the user from anything any app that the user chooses to run with administrative privileges. In this case, the app was Windows Update, which a lot of people trust, but it could have been anything. Thanks for that Q. Well spotted. What's the world coming to when you can't even trust M$! (; ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability
Benoit Renard wrote: David E. Ross wrote: The malware is a Firefox extension that (among other things) disables the ability of Firefox to remove it. As far as I know, they didn't disable uninstallation. It just isn't possible while using Firefox because it's installed on the application level, and not in the user's profile. If only that was the case. Please see below. http://annoyances.org/exec/show/article08-600 Snip: "Unfortunately, Microsoft in their infinite wisdom has taken steps to make the removal of this extension particularly difficult - open the Add-ons window in Firefox, and you'll notice the Uninstall button next to their extension is grayed out! Their reasoning, according to Microsoft blogger Brad Abrams, is that the extension needed "support at the machine level in order to enable the feature for all users on the machine," which, of course, is precisely the reason this add-on is bad news for all Firefox users." http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=1716&tag=nl.e011 Snip: "We added this support at the machine level in order to enable the feature for all users on the machine. Seems reasonable right? Well, turns out that enabling this functionality at the machine level, rather than at the user level means that the “Uninstall” button is grayed out in the Firefox Add-ons menu because standard users are not permitted to uninstall machine-level components." ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability
David E. Ross wrote: On 6/20/2009 6:02 PM, David E. Ross wrote: On 6/20/2009 5:00 PM, Nairda wrote: Hi everyone. Can someone with a bit more understanding of these things please read this article and say weather this applies to SM as well? http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=1716&tag=nl.e011 Snip: In a surprise move this year, Microsoft has decided to quietly install what amounts to a massive security vulnerability in Firefox without informing the user. Find out what Microsoft has to say about it, and how you can undo the damage. Microsoft pushed out its .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 update this February End Snip. It looks rather nasty, and I wish I had read it sooner. Cheers. The malware is a Firefox extension that (among other things) disables the ability of Firefox to remove it. This apparently affects only Firefox 3.x because of the way extensions are installed. SeaMonkey 1.1.x is related to Firefox 2.x and is not affected because of a different scheme for installing extensions. I don't know if SeaMonkey 2.x will be affected, but it does use the same extension installation scheme as Firefox 3.x. In any case, I've avoided this problem. My Automatic Updates is set for "Notify me but don't automatically download or install them." Since I use Internet Explorer only to get Windows updates and to check my own Web pages, I have rejected all .NET Framework (and ActiveX) updates. Suddenly, I'm very glad I did not update my Windows XP SP2 to Windows XP SP3. The latter would have included this malware. See bug #499521 at <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=499521>. It turns out that this problem was known at the beginning of February. New bug #499521 is a duplicate of bug #476430 (see <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=476430>). I find it strange that there is some debate whether to take any corrective action. Thank you David for your most adroit observations. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability
Nairda wrote:
Hi everyone.
Can someone with a bit more understanding of these things please read
this article and say weather this applies to SM as well?
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=1716&tag=nl.e011
Snip:
In a surprise move this year, Microsoft has decided to quietly install
what amounts to a massive security vulnerability in Firefox without
informing the user. Find out what Microsoft has to say about it, and how
you can undo the damage. Microsoft pushed out its .NET Framework 3.5
Service Pack 1 update this February
End Snip.
It looks rather nasty, and I wish I had read it sooner.
Cheers.
PS.
If so, what mods need to be made to the following instructions to apply
it to SeeMonkey?
Remove the Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant (ClickOnce) Firefox Extension
Intended For
Windows 2000
Windows 7
Windows XP
Windows Vista
The Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 update, pushed through
the Windows Update service to all recent editions of Windows in February
2009, installs the Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant firefox extension
without asking your permission.
This update adds to Firefox one of the most dangerous vulnerabilities
present in all versions of Internet Explorer: the ability for websites
to easily and quietly install software on your PC. Since this design
flaw is one of the reasons you may have originally chosen to abandon IE
in favour of a safer browser like Firefox, you may wish to remove this
extension with all due haste.
Unfortunately, Microsoft in their infinite wisdom has taken steps to
make the removal of this extension particularly difficult - open the
Add-ons window in Firefox, and you'll notice the Uninstall button next
to their extension is grayed out! Their reasoning, according to
Microsoft blogger Brad Abrams, is that the extension needed "support at
the machine level in order to enable the feature for all users on the
machine," which, of course, is precisely the reason this add-on is bad
news for all Firefox users.
Here's the bafflingly-convoluted procedure required to remove this
garbage from Firefox:
1. Open Registry Editor (type regedit in the Start menu Search box in
Vista/Windows 7, or in XP's Run window).
2. Expand the branches to the following key:
* On 32-bit systems: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \ SOFTWARE \ Mozilla \ Firefox \
Extensions
* On x64 systems: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \ SOFTWARE \ Wow6432Node \ Mozilla
\ Firefox \ Extensions
3. Delete the value named {20a82645-c095-46ed-80e3-08825760534b} from
the right pane.
4. Close the Registry Editor when you're done.
5. Open a new Firefox window, and in the address bar, type about:config
and press Enter.
6. Type microsoftdotnet in the Filter field to quickly find the
general.useragent.extra.microsoftdotnet setting.
7. Right-click general.useragent.extra.microsoftdotnet and select Reset.
8. Restart Firefox.
9. Open Windows Explorer, and navigate to
%SYSTEMDRIVE%\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v3.5\Windows Presentation
Foundation.
10. Delete the DotNetAssistantExtension folder entirely.
11. Open the Add-ons window in Firefox to confirm that the Microsoft
.NET Framework Assistant extension has been removed.
It will be a great day when PC users no longer have to waste this much
time to protect themselves from those who write the software they use.
(And if you're thinking, "Why not just use a Mac," may I remind you of
the MobileMe junk recently installed on so many Windows machines without
their owners' permission!)
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability
Hi everyone. Can someone with a bit more understanding of these things please read this article and say weather this applies to SM as well? http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=1716&tag=nl.e011 Snip: In a surprise move this year, Microsoft has decided to quietly install what amounts to a massive security vulnerability in Firefox without informing the user. Find out what Microsoft has to say about it, and how you can undo the damage. Microsoft pushed out its .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 update this February End Snip. It looks rather nasty, and I wish I had read it sooner. Cheers. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: some email addresses download mail to News Folder's Inbox
Hartmut Figge wrote: Nairda: Nairda wrote: Really? No one knows anything about this bug? Well, what bug? *g* |I have a slight problem with where some of my email addresses |downloads their mail to. |some email addresses download mail to News Folder's Inbox I have to guess what your problem is. Perhaps you have several Mail Accounts and some of them use use Local Folders. Look under Server Settings -> Advanced, if 'Global Inbox (Local Folders Account)' is checked. Hartmut Thank you so much Hartmut, you are a scholar and a gentleman. Mark this one as resolved. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: some email addresses download mail to News Folder's Inbox
Nairda wrote: Nairda wrote: Hi everyone. I have a slight problem with where some of my email addresses downloads their mail to. I have composed filters to work around this problem and changed folder options for them, but it's still a bit perplexing to me as to why it happens in the first place, and how to change this behaviour. Any tips will be greatly appreciated. TIA. -Nairda No? Really? No one knows anything about this bug? Or has MSS become a bit cliquey in it's old age? Does no one want to help a girl in trouble? Maybe chivalry really is dead. :) SeaMonkey 1.1.16 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081204 SeaMonkey/1.1.14 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0/MultiZilla v1.8.3.4e Vista Home Basic SP1 ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: some email addresses puts mail in News Folder's Inbox
Nairda wrote: Hi everyone. I have a slight problem with where some of my email addresses downloads their mail to. I have composed filters to work around this problem and changed folder options for them, but it's still a bit perplexing to me as to why it happens in the first place, and how to change this behaviour. Any tips will be greatly appreciated. TIA. -Nairda No? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
some email addresses puts mail in News Folder's Inbox
Hi everyone. I have a slight problem with where some of my email addresses downloads their mail to. I have composed filters to work around this problem and changed folder options for them, but it's still a bit perplexing to me as to why it happens in the first place, and how to change this behaviour. Any tips will be greatly appreciated. TIA. -Nairda ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
