Hi. I reply below:
Em [2022-08-28 dom 13:29:29+0100], Pete Biggs escreveu:
> If your work requires you to use HTML emails, then I suspect it's a
> battle not worth fighting. However when you use HTML, Evolution
> surrounds the sig with to try and maintain it's integrity
> and that seems to
On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 07:46 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 11:22 +0200, Milan Crha via evolution-list
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 09:57 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote:
> > > In the past, when the config
> > > was stored in dconf, it was a bit more complicated since the
>
On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 11:22 +0200, Milan Crha via evolution-list wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 09:57 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote:
> > In the past, when the config
> > was stored in dconf, it was a bit more complicated since the dconf
> > keys needed to be dumped and then backed up. But now everything
On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 10:29 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> The only reliable mechanism to verify a tar archive is valid is to
> table it. :(
Hi,
I opened:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/evolution/-/issues/2011
for this, thus it's not forgotten.
Bye
Milan
On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 10:44 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote:
> Is backup-restore-gsettings.ini only generated when you create a
> backup or is it part of the usual operation of Evolution?
Hi,
it's created by the backup/restore only.
> Also, mine is over 2Mb, is that normal?
Not really. I guess
On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 11:22 +0200, Milan Crha via evolution-list wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 09:57 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote:
> > In the past, when the config
> > was stored in dconf, it was a bit more complicated since the dconf
> > keys needed to be dumped and then backed up. But now everything
On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 09:57 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote:
> In the past, when the config
> was stored in dconf, it was a bit more complicated since the dconf
> keys needed to be dumped and then backed up. But now everything is
> stored in .config/evolution.
Hi,
for what it's worth, most of the
On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 11:12 +0200, Milan Crha via evolution-list wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 16:28 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > maybe it depends on number of emails to purge?
>
> Hi,
> that's correct, the vacuum is not run always, only when it looks like
> it could help.
>
>
On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 16:28 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> maybe it depends on number of emails to purge?
Hi,
that's correct, the vacuum is not run always, only when it looks like
it could help.
Thanks for the backtrace (from the other mail in this thread), it's
helpful. I'll look on
>
> If the file size was too large for the file system, it still doesn't
> explain why there was no standard error stream and appropriate exit
> status. Such an event would have caused error messages.
I think you need to consider how the backup process is run. Normally
people start Evolution
On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 11:51 -0500, c. marlow wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 11:49 +0100, Pete Biggs wrote:
>
> > > > I would possibly go as far as to say that that particular
> > > > functionality
> > > > has run its course and could be consigned to the big bit-bucket
> > > > in
> > > > the
>
On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 21:33 -0700, Mr. J wrote:
> So there's something about the process or
> the external hard drive (or both?) that prevents the creation of a
> valid .tar.gz backup file on my hard drive. It was recently
> formatted, so I'm at a loss to explain.
Hi,
while even a brand new
12 matches
Mail list logo
