Le 22 juin 2011, David E. Ross a écrit :
Also note that setting the em:maxVersion to 2.* might not work with a
pending update to the Add-ons Manager. I'm not sure, but I think the
new Add-ons Manager will reject wild-cards in version numbers.
Maybe 2.99 could then be used as a workaround?
On 6/22/11 5:50 AM, Ant wrote:
Hi!
Yesterday, I was messing with a new/clean installation of SM v2.1 in a
XP Pro. SP2 (IE6) virtual machine at work to see which of my current
extensions work or not.
I decided to try the latest PrefBar extension first from
Or is it just me on my three PCs (64-bit W7 HPE, XP Pro. SP3, and
Debian/Linux)?
--
Maybe it's like an ant hive... Bees man, bees have hives. You know
what I mean. It's like one female that runs the whole show. Yes, the
queen. Yeah the mamma. She is bad*ss, man. I mean big. These things
ain't
Ant schrieb:
Or is it just me on my three PCs (64-bit W7 HPE, XP Pro. SP3, and
Debian/Linux)?
Automatically appliable updates for 2.0.14 to 2.1 will be generated and
offered within the next weeks, but are not ready yet.
Robert Kaiser
--
Note that any statements of mine - no matter how
On 6/11/2011 4:32 AM PT, Robert Kaiser typed:
Or is it just me on my three PCs (64-bit W7 HPE, XP Pro. SP3, and
Debian/Linux)?
Automatically appliable updates for 2.0.14 to 2.1 will be generated and
offered within the next weeks, but are not ready yet.
Ah. So should I wait for those or just
Robert Kaiser a écrit :
Automatically appliable updates for 2.0.14 to 2.1 will be generated and
offered within the next weeks, but are not ready yet.
Hello,
Thank-you for your answer. I will wait for the updates from 2.0.14 to 2.1.
___
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Ant schrieb:
On 6/11/2011 4:32 AM PT, Robert Kaiser typed:
Or is it just me on my three PCs (64-bit W7 HPE, XP Pro. SP3, and
Debian/Linux)?
Automatically appliable updates for 2.0.14 to 2.1 will be generated and
offered within the next weeks, but are not ready yet.
Interviewed by CNN on 11/06/2011 08:43, Ant told the world:
Ah. So should I wait for those or just overinstall with the full
installer? I assume the upgrade patch is smaller.
Probably not that much smaller -- it's a pretty substantial change (new
Gecko version, new bookmarks engine, a lot of
On 6/11/2011 12:29 PM PT, MCBastos typed:
Ah. So should I wait for those or just overinstall with the full
installer? I assume the upgrade patch is smaller.
Probably not that much smaller -- it's a pretty substantial change (new
Gecko version, new bookmarks engine, a lot of other new
On 06/11/2011 10:13 AM, Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Ant schrieb:
On 6/11/2011 4:32 AM PT, Robert Kaiser typed:
Or is it just me on my three PCs (64-bit W7 HPE, XP Pro. SP3, and
Debian/Linux)?
Automatically appliable updates for 2.0.14 to 2.1 will be generated and
On 6/11/2011 9:21 PM, NoOp wrote:
On 06/11/2011 10:13 AM, Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Ant schrieb:
On 6/11/2011 4:32 AM PT, Robert Kaiser typed:
Or is it just me on my three PCs (64-bit W7 HPE, XP Pro. SP3, and
Debian/Linux)?
Automatically appliable updates for 2.0.14
Question:
Thruout the following post, URL is repeatedly shown as 'URI' or some such.
The L in URL stands for Locator, and I'm wondering why all acronyms in here
show up as 'URI', even in the RFC quote.
keith whaley
David E. Ross wrote:
On 4/2/11 5:24 AM, Ant wrote:
On 4/2/2011 2:08 AM PT,
On 4/2/2011 11:17 AM PT, Paul B. Gallagher typed:
Yeh. I get plenty of plain-text emails where wrapping by the sending
program breaks a link and I have to reassemble it before using it. This
is especially bothersome when the message has been through several reply
iterations. Most but not all
Keith Whaley wrote:
Question: Thruout the following post, URL is repeatedly shown as
'URI' or some such. The L in URL stands for Locator, and I'm
wondering why all acronyms in here show up as 'URI', even in the RFC
quote.
URLs are a subset of URIs - Uniform Resource Identifiers. Computer
On 4/3/11 5:24 AM, Keith Whaley wrote:
Question:
Thruout the following post, URL is repeatedly shown as 'URI' or some such.
The L in URL stands for Locator, and I'm wondering why all acronyms in here
show up as 'URI', even in the RFC quote.
keith whaley
David E. Ross wrote:
On 4/2/11
Hi!
Is there a way to automatically get rid of those s and s? I prefer not
having those.
Thank you in advance. :)
--
Ants die in sugar. --Malawi
/\___/\ Phil./Ant @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
|
On 4/2/2011 2:08 AM PT, Jens Hatlak typed:
Ant wrote:
Is there a way to automatically get rid of those s and s? I prefer not
having those.
AFAICS they will be gone in SM 2.1.
Awesome. I will wait for it.
What's the reasons for and ? They don't make sense to me. What's
wrong without
Ant wrote:
What's the reasons for and ? They don't make sense to me. What's
wrong without them since most programs convert http to links just fine?
I think the point is to make clear which characters belongs to the link
and which do not. Sometimes wrapping makes that hard to predict
On 4/2/11 5:24 AM, Ant wrote:
On 4/2/2011 2:08 AM PT, Jens Hatlak typed:
Ant wrote:
Is there a way to automatically get rid of those s and s? I prefer not
having those.
AFAICS they will be gone in SM 2.1.
Awesome. I will wait for it.
What's the reasons for and ? They don't make
Jens Hatlak wrote:
Ant wrote:
What's the reasons for and ? They don't make sense to me. What's
wrong without them since most programs convert http to links just fine?
I think the point is to make clear which characters belongs to the link
and which do not. Sometimes wrapping makes that hard
On 3/25/2011 4:47 PM PT, Jens Hatlak typed:
Is there a way to drag and drop a group of opened SM2.0.x web browser's
tabs to move them around? I know I can do one at a time, but not two or
more.
There is no such option built into either SM 2.0 or 2.1.
I would like to move them in the current
Hi!
Is there a way to drag and drop a group of opened SM2.0.x web browser's
tabs to move them around? I know I can do one at a time, but not two or
more. I would like to move them in the current web browser window or a
new/another web browser window.
Thank you in advance. :)
--
Any spoke
Ant wrote:
Is there a way to drag and drop a group of opened SM2.0.x web browser's
tabs to move them around? I know I can do one at a time, but not two or
more.
There is no such option built into either SM 2.0 or 2.1.
I would like to move them in the current web browser window or a
new
Mort wrote:
I did just that, and the screen says that there are no updates available.
That's strange, but I believe you.
So, do I go with the download URL that connects to a German server that
is allegedly not verifiable? I really would like to download an duse the
latest version = 2.0.1.
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Mort wrote:
I did just that, and the screen says that there are no updates available.
That's strange, but I believe you.
So, do I go with the download URL that connects to a German server that
is allegedly not verifiable? I really would like to download an duse the
Mort wrote:
The download for SM 2.0.1 is not verifiable, has no certified signature,
and per my current SM 2, cannot be trusted.
That's your operating system telling that, not your SeaMonkey.
What do I do about downloading the new version? Is there is a safe
download URL?
Yes, use the Help
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Mort wrote:
The download for SM 2.0.1 is not verifiable, has no certified signature,
and per my current SM 2, cannot be trusted.
That's your operating system telling that, not your SeaMonkey.
What do I do about downloading the new version? Is there is a safe
download
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago
On 12/17/2009 05:40 PM, Mort wrote:
...
Hi,
The download for SM 2.0.1 is not verifiable, has no certified signature,
and per my current SM 2, cannot be trusted. The download notice is from
Germany. (No slur intended, just the facts.)
What do I do about downloading the new version? Is
Paul wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117. I am still with 1117.
I should
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117. I am still
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117. I am still
On 12/16/2009 2:45 PM, John wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/16/2009 2:45 PM, John wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117. I am still
John wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117
Rufus wrote:
John wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago
John wrote:
Rufus wrote:
John wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year
Paul wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117. I am still with 1117.
I should
John Doue wrote:
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117. I am still
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0 vanished.
It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a username
password for email accounts. ugly.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0 vanished.
It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a username
password for email accounts. ugly.
I went back to, didn't want the hassle that SM2.0 brought
Norvin wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I went back to, didn't want the hassle that SM2.0 brought with it.
Welcome Back
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0 vanished.
It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a username
password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117. I am still with 1117.
I should be good now
Paul wrote:
John wrote:
Just re installed 1.1.18 and all the problems I had with SM2.0
vanished. It was really annoying using SM2.0 it kept asking for a
username password for email accounts. ugly.
I used Netscape 4.08 until a year ago, then went
to SM 1117. I am still with 1117.
I should
Pat Welch wrote:
John wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Danny Kile wrote:
It is one of the downsides of the suite approach that when one component
is busy, it does tend to lock up the others.
Why? The parts are in threads, right? Or is this a Windows thing rahter than a
SM thing?
I keep Camino available for that. If SM
Robert Kaiser wrote:
John wrote:
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps
not. Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I guess I'll
either have to go back
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I guess I'll either
have
S. Beaulieu wrote:
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I
S. Beaulieu wrote:
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I
Leonidas Jones wrote:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does
John wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps
not.
Downloading headers
John wrote:
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I guess I'll either
have
Pat Welch wrote:
John wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps
Stan wrote:
John wrote:
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I guess I'll
John wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps
not.
Downloading headers
John wrote:
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I guess I'll either
have
Leonidas Jones wrote:
John wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
John a écrit :
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps
Danny Kile wrote:
John wrote:
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash Thunderbird. so I guess
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Danny Kile wrote:
John wrote:
I am wondering if anyone else has seen any instability in SM2.0?
I use Giganews as a news reader and almost every time I attempt to
download the Headers SM crashes. Maybe it is my system but, perhaps not.
Downloading headers does not crash
Danny Kile wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Danny Kile wrote:
John wrote:
/snip/
By the way, are you spoofing your UA?
Lee
Well I did not have this problem back several version ago.
Yes I am spoofing UA as Firefox, that is because I am viewing
TVGuide.com, remember I am the one who could not
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Danny Kile wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Danny Kile wrote:
John wrote:
/snip/
By the way, are you spoofing your UA?
Lee
Well I did not have this problem back several version ago.
Yes I am spoofing UA as Firefox, that is because I am viewing
TVGuide.com, remember I
Phillip Jones wrote:
[snipping the oldest part of the thread]
In version 1 (correct me if there are changes in v.2), I can
explicitly save a message as a draft, and it stays there
indefinitely until I take some explicit action like deleting or
sending it. Additionally, the program
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
[snipping the oldest part of the thread]
In version 1 (correct me if there are changes in v.2), I can
explicitly save a message as a draft, and it stays there
indefinitely until I take some explicit action like deleting or
sending it.
S. Beaulieu schrieb:
Martin Freitag a écrit :
Select the proper encoding there at the top (above the fonts).
Common encodings are Western and Unicode. If you change the fixed width
font for both, it should have an effect.
It changes the fonts in the body of emails/newsgroup messages, but
Martin Freitag a écrit :
Correct, this was one example ;-)
Ah! Gotcha!
But I guess I'm getting used to it as it doesn't bother me as much as it
did yesterday. It's only when text is bolded (for example, new messages)
that it's really obvious, with a kind of reddish halo.
Altogether,
On 12/03/2009 10:18 AM, Martin Freitag wrote:
S. Beaulieu schrieb:
Martin Freitag a écrit :
Select the proper encoding there at the top (above the fonts).
Common encodings are Western and Unicode. If you change the fixed width
font for both, it should have an effect.
It changes the fonts
Phillip Jones wrote:
Martin Freitag wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Ant wrote:
On 12/1/2009 2:40 AM PT, Daniel typed:
Sorry, Martin, where do you get outbox from??? Is this
something new for version 2.0?? It doesn't appear,
natively, in my SM 1.1.15 (and older)
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Martin Freitag wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Ant wrote:
On 12/1/2009 2:40 AM PT, Daniel typed:
Sorry, Martin, where do you get outbox from??? Is this
something new for version 2.0?? It doesn't appear,
natively, in my
You can select your default Browser Starting Page in SM2.0 as in all
previous versions. However, if you use the Switch Profile tool and
SeaMonkey is closed from the new profile, your Browser Starting Page
preference is not honored the next time you start SeaMonkey. Instead,
the page on display
robert.ga...@att.net schrieb:
You can select your default Browser Starting Page in SM2.0 as in all
previous versions. However, if you use the Switch Profile tool and
SeaMonkey is closed from the new profile, your Browser Starting Page
preference is not honored the next time you start SeaMonkey
Leonidas Jones schrieb:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Well, there is only one thing: my fonts in SM (and not elsewhere, it
semms, but I haven't played much with anything but SM) now look all kind
of fuzzy/blurry, not as sharp as they were on my old computer. I've
tried playing with my screen's and
Martin Freitag wrote:
or choose another
font for things like the message display in the Seamonkey preferences,
e.g. compare Courier and Courier New for the fixed width font and you'll
see a huuuge difference when reading mail/newsgroup messages.
regards
Hum. I can't seem to find how to do
On 12/2/2009 2:00 AM, robert.ga...@att.net wrote:
You can select your default Browser Starting Page in SM2.0 as in all
previous versions. However, if you use the Switch Profile tool and
SeaMonkey is closed from the new profile, your Browser Starting Page
preference is not honored the next
S. Beaulieu schrieb:
Martin Freitag wrote:
or choose another
font for things like the message display in the Seamonkey preferences,
e.g. compare Courier and Courier New for the fixed width font and you'll
see a huuuge difference when reading mail/newsgroup messages.
regards
Hum. I can't seem
S. Beaulieu schrieb:
Martin Freitag wrote:
or choose another
font for things like the message display in the Seamonkey preferences,
e.g. compare Courier and Courier New for the fixed width font and you'll
see a huuuge difference when reading mail/newsgroup messages.
regards
Hum. I can't seem
Martin Freitag a écrit :
Edit = Preferences = Appearance = Fonts?
(fixed width at the bottom)
I tried that, but it didn't change anything. I think I'm just unkowingly
skipping a step...
S.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
S. Beaulieu schrieb:
Martin Freitag a écrit :
Edit = Preferences = Appearance = Fonts?
(fixed width at the bottom)
I tried that, but it didn't change anything. I think I'm just unkowingly
skipping a step...
Select the proper encoding there at the top (above the fonts).
Common encodings
Martin Freitag a écrit :
Select the proper encoding there at the top (above the fonts).
Common encodings are Western and Unicode. If you change the fixed width
font for both, it should have an effect.
It changes the fonts in the body of emails/newsgroup messages, but
nowhere else.
S.
Martin Freitag wrote:
Daniel schrieb:
Ant wrote:
Hi!
Does outbox always go in Local Folders? I use various e-mail
accounts and servers. I'd like to have it each account use their own
outbox that I send later. They all ended up in Local Folder's outbox.
There are no outbox settings I see in
On 12/1/2009 2:40 AM PT, Daniel typed:
Sorry, Martin, where do you get outbox from??? Is this something new for
version 2.0?? It doesn't appear, natively, in my SM 1.1.15 (and older)
profile!!
When you use Send Later, where does it go?
--
To conquer the world, we must be as meticulous and
I'll be getting a new computer either today or tomorrow. While I am
familiar with the profile transfer process, which I've done many times
before, I've never done it on anything more exotic than going from Win2K
to WinXP.
So my question is, is there any specific process to use to transfer my
S. Beaulieu wrote:
I'll be getting a new computer either today or tomorrow. While I am
familiar with the profile transfer process, which I've done many times
before, I've never done it on anything more exotic than going from Win2K
to WinXP.
So my question is, is there any specific process to
Leonidas Jones wrote:
The standard cut and paste manual move will work, as long as you find
the proper profile location, which is different on Win7 then on either
2K or XP:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile_folder_-_SeaMonkey
Thank you!
Just to be sure I was clear, my regular CP approach
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
The standard cut and paste manual move will work, as long as you find
the proper profile location, which is different on Win7 then on either
2K or XP:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile_folder_-_SeaMonkey
Thank you!
Just to be sure I was clear, my
S. Beaulieu wrote:
I'll be getting a new computer either today or tomorrow. While I am
familiar with the profile transfer process, which I've done many times
before, I've never done it on anything more exotic than going from Win2K
to WinXP.
So my question is, is there any specific process to
Ant wrote:
On 12/1/2009 2:40 AM PT, Daniel typed:
Sorry, Martin, where do you get outbox from??? Is this something new for
version 2.0?? It doesn't appear, natively, in my SM 1.1.15 (and older)
profile!!
When you use Send Later, where does it go?
Drafts.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If
Phillip Jones wrote:
Ant wrote:
On 12/1/2009 2:40 AM PT, Daniel typed:
Sorry, Martin, where do you get outbox from??? Is this something new for
version 2.0?? It doesn't appear, natively, in my SM 1.1.15 (and older)
profile!!
When you use Send Later, where does it go?
Drafts.
On my
Leonidas Jones wrote:
As long as you are moving a SeaMonkey 2.0 profile from Win 2K to Win 7,
there should be no problem with your procedure.
You were right! I'm writing from the new computer and the transfer was
100% painless and easy! I just hard a hard time figuring out how to not
have
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Ant wrote:
On 12/1/2009 2:40 AM PT, Daniel typed:
Sorry, Martin, where do you get outbox from??? Is this something new
for
version 2.0?? It doesn't appear, natively, in my SM 1.1.15 (and older)
profile!!
When you use Send Later, where does it
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
As long as you are moving a SeaMonkey 2.0 profile from Win 2K to Win 7,
there should be no problem with your procedure.
You were right! I'm writing from the new computer and the transfer was
100% painless and easy! I just hard a hard time figuring
Leonidas Jones wrote:
It is a pretty easy approach. I amso glad to here its working for you.
Let us know if we can be of further help.
Well, there is only one thing: my fonts in SM (and not elsewhere, it
semms, but I haven't played much with anything but SM) now look all kind
of
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
It is a pretty easy approach. I amso glad to here its working for you.
Let us know if we can be of further help.
Well, there is only one thing: my fonts in SM (and not elsewhere, it
semms, but I haven't played much with anything but SM) now look all
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Ant wrote:
On 12/1/2009 2:40 AM PT, Daniel typed:
Sorry, Martin, where do you get outbox from??? Is this something new for
version 2.0?? It doesn't appear, natively, in my SM 1.1.15 (and older)
profile!!
When you use Send Later, where does it
Martin Freitag wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Ant wrote:
On 12/1/2009 2:40 AM PT, Daniel typed:
Sorry, Martin, where do you get outbox from??? Is this something new
for
version 2.0?? It doesn't appear, natively, in my SM 1.1.15 (and older)
profile!!
When you use
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
