Re: KMail 3.2.3-1 instability

2004-08-08 Thread Nick Leverton
On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 07:45:28AM -0700, Brian Kimball wrote: > (I bound those keys to those functions so I can see what my newly > installed spamassassin is doing. I now find it kind of ironic that > since I've installed spamassassin I've never spent more time looking at > or been more curio

Re: KMail 3.2.3-1 instability

2004-08-07 Thread David P James
On Sat 7 August 2004 10:45, Brian Kimball wrote: > > Exact same happened to me. It was pretty damn funny. > > FWIW, I've been using Alt+H bound to "all headers" and Alt+F to > switch back to "fancy headers". Works good for me. > > brian > > (I bound those keys to those functions so I can s

Re: KMail 3.2.3-1 instability

2004-08-07 Thread Doug Holland
On Saturday 07 August 2004 8:13 am, Roy Bixler wrote: > I wonder if anyone has noticed that KMail 3.2.3-1 version recently > uploaded is less stable than the 3.2.2-2 version. In particular, I > sometimes do a "V" (View Source) command to view the full source of a > message to see its full headers.

Re: KMail 3.2.3-1 instability

2004-08-07 Thread Ralph Alvy
Roy Bixler wrote: > I wonder if anyone has noticed that KMail 3.2.3-1 version recently > uploaded is less stable than the 3.2.2-2 version. In particular, I > sometimes do a "V" (View Source) command to view the full source of > a > message to see its full headers. This never caused a problem > b

Re: KMail 3.2.3-1 instability

2004-08-07 Thread Adeodato =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sim=F3?=
* Marcus Thiesen [Sat, 07 Aug 2004 16:40:38 +0200]: > On Saturday 07 August 2004 16:35, Scott Granneman wrote: > > Of course, having updated the night before, as I was reading your message, > > I thought "Huh - that's interesting" and pushed V without even thinking. Of > > course, Kontact crashed l

Re: KMail 3.2.3-1 instability

2004-08-07 Thread Brian Kimball
On Saturday 07 August 2004 07:35 am, Scott Granneman wrote: > Of course, having updated the night before, as I was reading your > message, I thought "Huh - that's interesting" and pushed V without > even thinking. Of course, Kontact crashed like a drunken man on a > unicycle: hard, fast, & immedia

Re: KMail 3.2.3-1 instability

2004-08-07 Thread Marcus Thiesen
On Saturday 07 August 2004 16:35, Scott Granneman wrote: > Of course, having updated the night before, as I was reading your message, > I thought "Huh - that's interesting" and pushed V without even thinking. Of > course, Kontact crashed like a drunken man on a unicycle: hard, fast, & > immediately

Re: KMail 3.2.3-1 instability

2004-08-07 Thread Scott Granneman
On Saturday 07 August 2004 9:13 am, Roy Bixler wrote: > I wonder if anyone has noticed that KMail 3.2.3-1 version recently > uploaded is less stable than the 3.2.2-2 version. In particular, I > sometimes do a "V" (View Source) command to view the full source of a > message to see its full headers.