Colin,
;; (setq 'bbdb-obsolete-net-canonicalize-net-hook 'bbdb-canonicalize-net-hook)
;; If you already have a `bbdb-obsolete-net-canonicalize-net-hook',
;; then call `bbdb-canonicalize-net-hook' from within your function.
Shouldn't that read as follows:
;; (setq
Patrick Campbell-Preston writes:
;; (setq 'bbdb-obsolete-net-canonicalize-net-hook 'bbdb-canonicalize-net-hook)
Shouldn't that read as follows:
;; (setq bbdb-canonicalize-net-hook 'bbdb-obsolete-net-canonicalize-net-hook)
Yes.
I feel a 'bbdb-make-net-address-at-point-obsolete' function
I feel a 'bbdb-make-net-address-at-point-obsolete' function coming
on...
Which point? How about `bbdb-obsolete-net-make-rest-obsolete'?
Generally, everything after a particular point in `net' is obsolete.
Well, a lot of my records end up with a valid new alternate address (a
'home'
On March 16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Even if some of these extra addresses are invalid or out of date,
there are still messages corresponding to almost all of them in my
mailboxes, so deleting them from the BBDB record is not a permanent
solution. For a lot of records they significantly
