On 2007-10-19, Mumia W.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reply to list:
http://cweiske.de/misc_extensions.htm#replyToList
Oddly enough this one isn't working for me on testing's TB! (2.0.0.6). I
have both MHengy and Enigmail installed. :(
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 12:01:42PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
I started a small mailing list for some old buddies and I to use
as we
plan our camping trip for next year. Its something we do every 4 years
or so and it generates all kinds of mail in the process. I thought a
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 09:34:47PM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 08:13:54AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 09:51:21PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Miles Bader wrote:
I expect that google is somewhat chary about adding more buttons to
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 08:13:54AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 09:51:21PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Miles Bader wrote:
I expect that google is somewhat chary about adding more buttons to
their UI (look how long it took them to add a delete button!),
On 10/18/2007 11:51 PM, Steve Lamb wrote:
Miles Bader wrote:
I expect that google is somewhat chary about adding more buttons to
their UI (look how long it took them to add a delete button!),
especially one as potentially confusing as reply-to-list-only. The
current reply-to-all is much
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 09:51:21PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Miles Bader wrote:
I expect that google is somewhat chary about adding more buttons to
their UI (look how long it took them to add a delete button!),
especially one as potentially confusing as reply-to-list-only. The
current
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
About what? Gmail did the right thing, given the information available.
The peculiar constraints of this mailing list are just that; gmail has
no way to detect them, so it's up to you as the reader to follow them
(or instruct your MUA to do so).
This
On 10/18/07, Miles Bader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
About what? Gmail did the right thing, given the information available.
The peculiar constraints of this mailing list are just that; gmail has
no way to detect them, so it's up to you as the reader to
Bret Busby wrote:
I hope that my apology is accepted, and that we can move on.
For what it's worth Bret, I apologize for blowing up on you also.
I won't apologize for being angry at the rest of the folks who dog-piled
on, who still aren't attempting to help you in any way, but had plenty
Steve Lamb wrote:
Nate Duehr wrote:
I didn't start the insults, please look back through the thread. The
original poster gets more and more agitated that people aren't
testing correctly without fully defining his problem from the
beginning.
I did, I started from the beginning and
Kelly Clowers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This being?
This being the idea that gmail has no way to detect that this
is a mailing list.
You're right, gmail can detect _that_.
Based on this gmail could add a reply to list button
... and it could add a button with that (reply to list only)
On 10/18/07, Miles Bader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kelly Clowers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This being?
This being the idea that gmail has no way to detect that this
is a mailing list.
You're right, gmail can detect _that_.
Based on this gmail could add a reply to list button
... and
Miles Bader wrote:
I expect that google is somewhat chary about adding more buttons to
their UI (look how long it took them to add a delete button!),
especially one as potentially confusing as reply-to-list-only. The
current reply-to-all is much safer.
Which is the exact reason why
On 10/15/07, Bret Busby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I note that the only action that I can take, when the offence occurs,
is to twice minimise the offending browser windows that are opened by
the application; as, as already mentioned, if I close the offending
browser windows, it crashes the
On 10/17/07, Kelly Clowers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/15/07, Bret Busby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mozilla stuff
Sorry about the To/CC thing, I was so busy writing that
I forgot gmail is stupid about mailing lists.
Note to self: time to bug google about that again.
Cheers,
Kelly
--
To
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:48:40PM -0700, Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
Nate Duehr wrote:
Perhaps you
might argue that the software should handle it perfectly, but at that
level of insanity, I certainly don't care anymore... as one user to
another -- since I'm not a
Kelly Clowers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sorry about the To/CC thing, I was so busy writing that
I forgot gmail is stupid about mailing lists.
Note to self: time to bug google about that again.
About what? Gmail did the right thing, given the information available.
The peculiar constraints of
On 10/17/07, Miles Bader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kelly Clowers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Note to self: time to bug google about that again.
About what? Gmail did the right thing, given the information available.
The peculiar constraints of this mailing list are just that; gmail has
no way
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 01:19:01PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Nate Duehr wrote:
[I think I've managed to snip the bile]
41 webpages open and you're experiencing problems. Gee, there's a big
surprise. You're somewhat pushing the bounds of sanity at that point, for
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:19:01 +0800 (WST), Bret Busby [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I didn't expect bigotry on this list.
I am not sure bigotry means what you think it does. You asked
for volunteers to help you with a problem; they said that the problem
you presented was presented in a
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:52:40PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Steve Lamb wrote:
Not sure what's opening the extra windows though.
Unless it's some for of advertising from the web sites. I browse
through a sqiud+adzapper proxy so I tend to miss a large portion of cruft
that the net tries
Daniel Burrows wrote:
Personally, I would hope that developers and package maintainers would
also keep their insults to themselves.
Touche'.
BTW (not just to you, Daniel) looks like it's time for the friendly
reminder of list CoC... Don't CC unless requested. Thanks.
--
Miles Bader wrote:
About what? Gmail did the right thing, given the information available.
The peculiar constraints of this mailing list are just that; gmail has
no way to detect them, so it's up to you as the reader to follow them
(or instruct your MUA to do so).
This is false and has
On Oct 17, 2007, at 8:08 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:48:40PM -0700, Steve Lamb
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
Nate Duehr wrote:
Perhaps you
might argue that the software should handle it perfectly, but at
that
level of insanity, I certainly don't care
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 04:56:45PM -0600, Nate Duehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
On Oct 17, 2007, at 8:08 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:48:40PM -0700, Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
Nate Duehr wrote:
Perhaps you
might argue that the software
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 01:19:01PM +0800, Bret Busby [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
The kernel should handle cleaning up application memory (or permanently
caching any memory that wasn't de-allocated at the iceweasel/iceape
crashes. Once cached, if never called for again they'll just
Nate Duehr wrote:
I didn't start the insults, please look back through the thread. The
original poster gets more and more agitated that people aren't testing
correctly without fully defining his problem from the beginning.
I did, I started from the beginning and didn't feel compelled to
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 04:56:45PM -0600, Nate Duehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
On Oct 17, 2007, at 8:08 AM, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:48:40PM -0700, Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
Nate Duehr
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:20:41 -0700
From: Andrew Sackville-West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Query about Iceape, Iceweasel
On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 12:56:31PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
Who is responsible
On 10/16/2007 01:30 AM, Bret Busby wrote:
[...]
The untitled windows appear to open as pop-ups, although I have a
setup configuration of the web browsers, to block pop-ups, which
obviously does not work within the software.
The problem also appears to occur, apart from when I open links in
Mumia W.. wrote:
Your Iceweasel/Mozilla profile might also be messed up. Move your
profile to someplace where Iceweasel can't find it, e.g. a trash
directory. Do this before starting iceweasel again. Read here about your
profile folder:
Alternatively, you can invoke it as:
iceweasel
Bret Busby wrote:
The web addresses, or, URL's, that are involved with the unauthorised
untitld windows being opened, vary, from addresses to which I have
previously been, to addresses that I regularly visit, inclusing the two
below, with such addresses being unlikely to involve malicious
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Mumia W.. wrote:
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:14:11 -0500
From: Mumia W.. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Debian User List debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Query about Iceape, Iceweasel
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:34:28 + (UTC)
Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Bret Busby wrote:
Before I go purging and reinstalling software, and trying to rebuild
associations (or whatever they are named), like when I click on a link
to a .pdf file and it is opened by a PDF viewer (not Adobe Acrobat -
that is not installable), and then trying to again configure the
Nate Duehr wrote:
Bret Busby wrote:
The web addresses, or, URL's, that are involved with the unauthorised
untitld windows being opened, vary, from addresses to which I have
previously been, to addresses that I regularly visit, inclusing the
two below, with such addresses being unlikely to
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 01:48:32PM -0600, Nate Duehr wrote:
Your thread now (to me personally anyway reads like this):
Dear Debian community, I tried to drive the car you provided at RPM
red-line and excessive speeds for days on end, and it has exhibited some
bad behavior when I abuse it
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Nate Duehr wrote:
41 webpages open and you're experiencing problems. Gee, there's a big
surprise. You're somewhat pushing the bounds of sanity at that point, for
just about any browser.
(And my interest in helping with your problem just vanished completely. I
can't
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Nate Duehr wrote:
Note that on the top of the first example page it says:
This page has been replaced by an improved version so it will be
discontinued after August 31st 2006. Please update your bookmarks.
Cute. 2006, huh?
They're right on the ball there at the Oz
Nate Duehr wrote:
Bret Busby wrote:
As an example, for one country, to read the news, I have a bookmark
set that I use, that has 32 URL's, so that I have at least 32 tabs
open in the browser window for the news for that country. As I open
links for news stories, I can have tabs open, that go
Steve Lamb wrote:
Not sure what's opening the extra windows though.
Unless it's some for of advertising from the web sites. I browse through
a sqiud+adzapper proxy so I tend to miss a large portion of cruft that the net
tries to throw at my browser.
--
Steve C. Lamb |
On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 12:56:31PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
Who is responsible for Iceape and Iceweasel?
I am running Debian 4.0, which came with these two applications rather than
the Mozilla applications, and the two applications appear to be quite buggy
and unstable.
they are renamed
On Oct 10, 2007, at 12:20 AM, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
Both Iceape and Iceweasel, open up untitled windows when trying
to open
web pages at all kinds of locations, and, trying to close one of
these
untitled windows when it is initially displayed, crashes the
application,
including all
On 10/09/2007 11:56 PM, Bret Busby wrote:
Who is responsible for Iceape and Iceweasel?
apt-cache show iceweasel | grep Maintainer
I am running Debian 4.0, which came with these two applications rather
than the Mozilla applications, and the two applications appear to be
quite buggy and
Who is responsible for Iceape and Iceweasel?
I am running Debian 4.0, which came with these two applications rather
than the Mozilla applications, and the two applications appear to be
quite buggy and unstable.
To go to the Mozilla web site to try to install the equivalent
applications (I
44 matches
Mail list logo
