Hello Sudip,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 07:54:21 +0545 GMT (12/09/02, 09:09 +0700 GMT),
Sudip Pokhrel wrote:
SP> Hi Richard,
RL>> In the two years or so that I've been running NAV I've yet to have
RL>> anything nasty get onto my PC So from that point of view I'm very
RL>> reluctant to change, plus it
Hi Thomas,
TF> I am using PC-Cillin. It works good, the interface is easy, it good a
TF> 100% score on hackfix; the only thing I am waiting for is the TB
TF> plug-in.
Does PC-Cillin itself have a command line interface? Trend's engine is
what's behind OnTrack's AV package (SystemSuite) but OnTra
Hello Blarp,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:59:27 -0700 GMT (12/09/02, 14:59 +0700 GMT),
Blarp wrote:
B> Does PC-Cillin itself have a command line interface?
No, I think not.
B> If PC-Cillin doesn't do command line interaction then TB may have
B> trouble using it. Just a thought.
Most programs use mo
Hello Thomas,
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 3:40:20 AM, you wrote:
> I am using PC-Cillin.
Which version are you using?
--
David Cohen
Using The Bat! v1.60c on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
h
Hi Thomas,
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 14:40 your local time, (13:25 my local
time), you [TF] wrote:
TF> NAV uses an algorithm that tries to find as yet unknown malware.
TF> Other AV-software will check in their database whether any known
TF> malware is found in the file being scanned.
This
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Thomas,
@12-Sep-2002, 15:24 +0700 (09:24 UK time) Thomas F. [TF] in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
TF> Forgot for the A stood for, but the rest of API means
TF> Programmers' Interface.
Application.
- --
Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearl
Hello Dwight,
is there a shareware version for testing somewhere to download?
--
Ciao
Thomas
Mailer: The Bat!1.62/Beta5
System: Windows XP 2600
PGP: PGPckt 6.58 Build: 08 | Key: 0xBB9237A9
ICQ: 121117424 (hardly ever online)
HP: http://mirror.at/thebat/
__
For quite some time, I've seen a problem that I thought was a bug in
TB, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it's something that I should be
blaming on NAV.
When a message with multiple attachments arrives, if the attachments
are Word files or JPGs, I can count on some file corruption. The JPGs
will b
Hello Technology,
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 4:47:51 AM, you wrote:
BBTE> For quite some time, I've seen a problem that I thought was a bug in
BBTE> TB, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it's something that I should be
BBTE> blaming on NAV.
BBTE> When a message with multiple attachments arrives
Hi fellow TB!ers,
I've had a problem occurring for some time, but haven't really worried about
it since it's just an annoyance. Ever since version 1.59, TB! will not
minimize (either automatically or manually)when it first comes up in my
Start menu on a computer boot/reboot. If I close TB! and re
Hello Lou,
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, at 10:06:04 GMT -0400 (9/11/02, 9:06 AM -0500 GMT
here), you wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
LY> SysCmdr is not really needed unless you want to boot Linux, etc.
LY> or want to use multiple primary partitions, hiding the unused ones.
If I wan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Mark,
@12-Sep-2002, 05:07 -0700 (13:07 UK time) Mark Bernard [MB] in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
BBTE>> For quite some time, I've seen a problem that I thought was a
BBTE>> bug in TB, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it's somethi
Hi,
This problem has been discussed in other threads. Same over here:
Attachements (Word, RTF, TXT...) are regularly messed up. I first
thought that the problem is sender-dependent but then realized it is
not. The spoilt attachments alwas stem from messages with multiple
attachments of different
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 8:33:26 AM, you wrote:
GS> Hello Lou,
GS> On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, at 10:06:04 GMT -0400 (9/11/02, 9:06 AM -0500 GMT
GS> here), you wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
LY>> SysCmdr is not really needed unless you want to boot Linux, etc.
LY>> or want t
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 4:47:51 AM, you wrote:
BBTE> For quite some time, I've seen a problem that I thought was a bug in
BBTE> TB, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it's something that I should be
BBTE> blaming on NAV.
BBTE> When a message with multiple attachments arrives, if the attachme
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 6:34:43 AM, Thomas Martin wrote:
> is there a shareware version for testing somewhere to download?
Not sure. Visit www.abacuslaw.com
--
Dwight A. Corrin
P O Box 47828
Wichita KS 67201-7828
316.263.9706 fax 316.263.6385
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! 1
Hi Technology,
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 07:47 your local time, (17:32 my local
time), you [BBT] wrote:
BBTE> For quite some time, I've seen a problem that I thought was a
BBTE> bug in TB, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it's something that I
BBTE> should be blaming on NAV.
At one time, I
Hi Technology,
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 07:47 your local time, (17:32 my local
time), you [BBT] wrote:
BBTE> For quite some time, I've seen a problem that I thought was a
BBTE> bug in TB, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it's something that I
BBTE> should be blaming on NAV.
At one time, I
It seems that Sudip Pokhrel said ...
S> Are you using ZA or behind any firewall? This may be worth looking
S> into.
Yes, ZA Plus is running here. I prefer not to disable it because I
consider it a last line of defense for outbound traffic in the event
that something slips through my defenses. It
Hi Sudip,
> Are you using ZA or behind any firewall? This may be worth looking
> into.
I, for one, do, so that might be a clue! But would that mean that no
firewall can be used together with TB if you want to receive correct
attachments? using a broadband access without firewall seems way to
da
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, Anselm Buehling wrote...
>> Are you using ZA or behind any firewall? This may be worth looking
>> into.
> I, for one, do, so that might be a clue! But would that mean that no
> firewall can be used together with TB i
When I run a search, and want to reply to one of the results, I
right-click onto it and say REPLY.
Now, the BAT just uses the account that I am in OUTSIDE the search,
and it does NOT use the account this mail actually went to.
Is this another one of the GREAT FEATURES or is there any way around
Hi Anselm,
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 at 16:40:29 [GMT +0200], you wrote:
AB> using a broadband access without firewall seems way to dangerous
AB> these days...
Might I recommend to read the FAQ of the (German speaking) newsgroup
de.comp.security.firewall?
http://www.iks-jena.de/mitarb/lut
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Anselm,
@12-Sep-2002, 16:40 +0200 (15:40 UK time) Anselm Buehling [AB] in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> Are you using ZA or behind any firewall? This may be worth
>> looking into.
AB> I, for one, do, so that might be a clue!
Hello Sudip,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 15:21:21 +0545 GMT (12/09/02, 16:36 +0700 GMT),
Sudip Pokhrel wrote:
TF>> NAV uses an algorithm that tries to find as yet unknown malware.
TF>> Other AV-software will check in their database whether any known
TF>> malware is found in the file being scanned.
SP>
Hello David,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 05:23:42 -0400 GMT (12/09/02, 16:23 +0700 GMT),
David Cohen wrote:
>> I am using PC-Cillin.
DC> Which version are you using?
I'm still using PCC6. as the updates still work, I see no reason to
pay again and get PC-Cillin 2000.
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
Moderator d
Hello Marck,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 13:44:34 +0100 GMT (12/09/02, 19:44 +0700 GMT),
Marck D Pearlstone wrote:
MDP> I think you've missed the point. Are you using NAV? Some other
MDP> real-time POP3 virus scanner?
MDP> I don't. I have been a TB user for over 4 years and receive 200-400
MDP> message
Hello Sebastian,
> Now, the BAT just uses the account that I am in OUTSIDE the search,
> and it does NOT use the account this mail actually went to.
What version of TB are you using? It works fine for me, it uses the
account of the folder where the message is stored when the search is
done, no m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Sebastian,
@12-Sep-2002, 17:06 +0200 (16:06 UK time) Sebastian [S] in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
S> Is this another one of the GREAT FEATURES or is there any way
S> around this?
On the status line of the new message editor yo
Hi Technology,
BBTE> I prefer not to disable it because I
BBTE> consider it a last line of defense for outbound traffic in the event
BBTE> that something slips through my defenses.
Get Kerio Personal Firewall. MUCH better than ZA+. Smaller footprint
and more configurable. KPF has a few quirks of
Hi Thomas,
TF> Most programs use more interfaces than just the user interfaces GUI
TF> and CLI. The SDK (Software Developers Kit) of any program will tell
TF> you where you can interface with the program. Forgot for the A stood
TF> for, but the rest of API means Programmers' Interface.
Of course
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Thomas,
@12-Sep-2002, 22:28 +0700 (16:28 UK time) Thomas F. [TF] in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
MDP>> I'll wager it's nothing to do with TB though.
TF> Let's see.
And now ZA peeps over the parapet yet again. If it were TB do
Hello William
Thank you for your email dated Thursday, September 12, 2002, 3:35:12 PM, in which you
wrote:
BBTE> If nothing else, I have been introduced to AVG Antivirus!
Let me introduce you an even better one :-)
www.eset.com
--
Regards
William
Flying with The Bat! 1.61 www.ritlabs.
Hello Anselm
Thank you for your email dated Thursday, September 12, 2002, 3:40:29 PM, in which you
wrote:
AB> ... would that mean that no firewall can be used together with TB if
AB> you want to receive correct attachments?
Certainly not.
I have broadband, NOD32, and Sygate Pro firewall. No
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi William,
@12-Sep-2002, 17:02 William Moore [WM] in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
BBTE>> If nothing else, I have been introduced to AVG Antivirus!
WM> Let me introduce you an even better one :-) www.eset.com
But the price is inf
Hi Seb.
At 11:06 AM on Thursday, September 12, 2002
you [S] wrote the following about 'I HATE
this BAT-Feature - any help?`':
S> When I run a search, and want to reply to
S> one of the results, I right-click onto it
S> and say REPLY.
S> Now, the BAT just uses the account that I
S> am in OUTSIDE
Hi Lars,
> Although some of the arguments might seem a bit exaggerated at first, I
> can tell from my own experience that not using a personal firewall isn't
> much of a loss. You only have to keep up with security updates for your
> system, but shouldn't everyone do that? ;-)
Hmm, while one ce
Well, this is pretty weird!
I "accidentally" sent out SEVERAL emails with the wrong account by
just hitting the "reply" button in the search results.
Now I finally saw that you can just choose the account name, and I
thank you all for pointing things out - BAT is ok after all, hehe. ;)
__
Hi Jonathan,
> Not at all... try turning off the mail filtering options, and see if
> that helps cure things. I haven't used ZA in a long while, so I
> cannot point you to where it is. Either that, or try a different
> firewall for a short while.
Thanks, will try that and hope it will be the
Turning off ZA mail filtering options did not help. So i'll have to
test on. Next step would be to completely deactivate ZA. Will do as
soon as I have time and a partner to test.
Kind regards,
Anselm
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> On Thursday, September 12, 2002, Anselm
BB> When a message with multiple attachments arrives, if the attachments
BB> are Word files or JPGs, I can count on some file corruption. The JPGs
BB> will be unreadable or partly readable, for example. This is virtually
BB> guaranteed to happen if there are 3 or more attachments.
BB> When the at
Hello Marck
Thank you for your email dated Thursday, September 12, 2002, 5:06:12 PM, in which you
wrote:
MDP> But the price is infinitely worse!
Spoken like a true Londoner ;-)
--
Regards
William
Flying with The Bat! 1.61 www.ritlabs.com/the_bat
Windows 2000 Pro 2195 Service Pack 2
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 12:26:55 PM, Eddy wrote:
> Forwarding a message with a corrupt attachment to a non-TB! user
> always results in an attachment that is perfectly valid for the
> recipient
If the file is alright after it is forwarded, it can't be corrupted
when you get it. Where do
Hallo Anselm,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 16:40:29 +0200GMT (12-9-02, 16:40 +0200GMT, where
I live), you wrote:
AB> But would that mean that no firewall can be used together with TB
AB> if you want to receive correct attachments?
No, it doesn't. I use TB, AVG and ZA (free version) and have never
receiv
It seems that Eddy said ...
E> This most certainly appears to be a problem with TB!. I used 'Help >
E> Feedback > Bug Report' to submit a bug (an even included my zip file of
E> the corrupted "Test" folder) but never received any acknowledgement or
E> any sort of response from RIT Labs.
I've be
Hi Technology,
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 10:35 your local time, (20:20 my local
time), you [BBT] wrote:
BBTE> I'll try contacting Zone Labs, too.
I had a bad experience with them. They kept sending me a same stock
mail suggesting to turn off Mail Safe setting. When this didn't work,
I ask
Hi Thomas,
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 22:22 your local time, (21:07 my local
time), you [TF] wrote:
TF> OK, so AVG uses it too. But then, AVG seems to catch only 60-odd
TF> percent of the viruses, according to hackfix.
So does Kaspersky though, and it does 100% :)
SP>> Besides, you always
Hi Marck,
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 16:08 your local time, (20:53 my local
time), you [MDP] wrote:
MDP> Anyway, it may be, as advised, that disabling the mail scanning
MDP> functions of ZA (... why it's a firewall - what business does
MDP> it have scanning mail for pity's sake!) will b
ON Thursday, September 12, 2002, 7:26:55 PM, you wrote:
E> Recently, I created a folder called "Test", into which I put several
E> messages which are "corrupt" in TB!. I zip'd the Test folder
E> (containing the .TBB and .TBI files) and mailed it to several TB!
E> users. When they created a "Tes
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 1:36:01 PM, Dwight wrote:
DAC> On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 12:26:55 PM, Eddy wrote:
>> Forwarding a message with a corrupt attachment to a non-TB! user
>> always results in an attachment that is perfectly valid for the
>> recipient
DAC> If the file is alrig
Sh'mae Eddy,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 15:38:37 [GMT -0400] (or 20:38 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled attachments' you wrote:
E> On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 1:36:01 PM, Dwight wrote:
DAC>> On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 12:26:55 PM, Eddy wrote:
E> Several TB! users have verified my claims a
ON Thursday, September 12, 2002, 9:38:37 PM, you wrote:
E> Several TB! users have verified my claims after I sent them my "Test"
E> mailbox that contains 2 messages which are corrupt when viewed/saved
E> by TB! but are fine when forwarded to others.
Eddy,
I would like a go at this. Can you pls
It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A> Tried swapping out your ram? You may have a dodgy chip somewhere?
A Adam ...
Everyone who has this problem has bad memory? And I have bad memory on
THREE computers? And the problem doesn't manifest itself with any
other e-mail program? (Not even wi
Sh'mae Technology,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 17:25:21 [GMT -0400] (or 22:25 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled attachments' you wrote:
BBTE> It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A>> Tried swapping out your ram? You may have a dodgy chip somewhere?
BBTE> A Adam ...
BBTE> Everyone who has this
Art-
Check the shortcut in the Startup folder - try adding the /minimize
command line argument if it's not already there.
-Mark Wieder
Using The Bat! v1.60h on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 2
Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL"
Sh'mae Technology,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 17:25:21 [GMT -0400] (or 22:25 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled attachments' you wrote:
BBTE> It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A>> Tried swapping out your ram? You may have a dodgy chip somewhere?
BBTE> A Adam ...
BBTE> Everyone who has this
Hello Marck,
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 5:44:34 AM, you wrote:
MB>> I've seen corruption of various file types.
MB>> Forwarding/redirecting the corrupt files back to myself results
MB>> in the files "fixing" themselves.
MDP> I think you've missed the point. Are you using NAV? Some other
MDP>
Sh'mae Mark,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 15:04:08 [GMT -0700] (or 23:04 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled attachments' you wrote:
MB> Hello Marck,
MB> Thursday, September 12, 2002, 5:44:34 AM, you wrote:
MB>>> I've seen corruption of various file types.
MB>>> Forwarding/redirecting the corrupt files b
Sh'mae Mark,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 15:04:08 [GMT -0700] (or 23:04 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled attachments' you wrote:
MB> Hello Marck,
MB> Thursday, September 12, 2002, 5:44:34 AM, you wrote:
MB> I'm using NAV 2002, and NIS2002. I just recently switched to TB! from
MB> PMMail2000 Pro. Ab
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 4:36:21 PM, Adam wrote:
E>> Several TB! users have verified my claims after I sent them my "Test"
E>> mailbox that contains 2 messages which are corrupt when viewed/saved
E>> by TB! but are fine when forwarded to others.
AR> Tried swapping out your ram? You may h
Sh'mae tbudl,
It looks like we need to isolate a common thread here among people.
Some questions that spring to mind are
1) FAt/FAT32 or NTFS?
2) Storing attachments in seperate drectory or in message
3) Encoding
4) Virus checker / firewall?
As a test placebo sample who doesn't suffer from
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 2:01:12 PM, Gerard wrote:
G> I am no expert on this but it sure looks like a corrupted Tbb or
G> TBI file. I belive you can delete index file and TB! will recreate
G> it. Have you tried that with a "corrupted" file in the folder?
I don't think so; I can create a
Sh'mae Eddy,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 18:09:44 [GMT -0400] (or 23:09 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled attachments' you wrote:
E> On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 4:36:21 PM, Adam wrote:
E>>> Several TB! users have verified my claims after I sent them my "Test"
E>>> mailbox that contains 2 messages
It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A> a) Its being corrupted in memory as the attachment is being reconstructed.
Agreed, but would it not have the same effect when the message is
being reconstructed in Eudora, Outlook, Outlook Express, Pegasus,
Netscape Maill, or SOME other program? I have neve
It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A> The other thing that crosses my mind is filesystem - obviously you're on Win98
A> and other people are on Winxp or whatever?
A> You all using fat32? Large disk?
I'm on XP. Wouldn't use FAT32 on a dare. All affected systems are
NTFS. All are Seagate drive
Sh'mae Technology,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 18:23:19 [GMT -0400] (or 23:23 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled attachments' you wrote:
BBTE> It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A>> a) Its being corrupted in memory as the attachment is being reconstructed.
BBTE> Agreed, but would it not have the same
It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A> 1) FAt/FAT32 or NTFS?
NTFS
A> 2) Storing attachments in seperate drectory or in message
I've tried both. If the attachment is in the message body,
sometimes I can recover from the problem by forwarding the
message to myself.
A> 3) Encoding
How
Sh'mae Technology,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 18:29:01 [GMT -0400] (or 23:29 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled attachments' you wrote:
BBTE> It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A>> The other thing that crosses my mind is filesystem - obviously you're on Win98
A>> and other people are on Winxp or wha
Sh'mae Technology,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 18:33:46 [GMT -0400] (or 23:33 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled messages' you wrote:
BBTE>How do I tell. A failed attachment had this header:
Account Properties -> Files and Directories
a.
--
| 12 September 2002, 23:37
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, 5:09:44 PM, Eddy wrote:
> All the evidence I have encountered seem to point to a problem with
> how TB! is processing attachments after they are received.
how about setting up an installation which saves attachments separate
from the messages, and send some of th
Sh'mae Technology,
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, at 18:33:46 [GMT -0400] (or 23:33 in Wales)
regarding 'Mangled messages' you wrote:
Bill
Do you run your own mail server - and if so, can you read through your logs in
case anything untoward there,,?
Just another random thought?
a
I'm going to
It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A> Account Properties -> Files and Directories
Oh. OK, but that's for outbound files, isn't it? I've never had a
problem sending a file. Mime64.
(From another message)
A> TB! on C drive or another drive?
A> Spaces in folder name (here its d:\TheBat)
TB on C:
It seems that Adam Rykala said ...
A> Do you run your own mail server - and if so, can you read through your logs in
A> case anything untoward there,,?
I wish. No, my domain is at Communitech.net, but I see the same
problem with messages that pass through ...
blinn.com
Hello Adam,
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 3:07:55 PM, you wrote:
MB>> I'm using NAV 2002, and NIS2002. I just recently switched to TB! from
MB>> PMMail2000 Pro. About a month ago. In all my years using PMMail2000,
MB>> never had a problem with corrupt attachments. Only thing I changed was
MB>>
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Roelof Otten [RO] wrote:'
RO> No, it doesn't. I use TB, AVG and ZA (free version) and have
RO> never received a corrupt attachment. BTW I run W98 and have got
RO> ADSL.
Hmmm. One of the lucky ones. I hope it continues for you. I had no
problems at f
Hi Bat users,
I was directed to this list by an automatic bot at bat ;]
I am a long-time user of The Bat! - a single-user on a laptop running
Win98.
Recently because I was unhappy with Opera's upgrade, I wanted to check
the userworthiness of Mozilla and so downloaded their latest. Just for
fu
Bats-
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 3:33:46 PM you wrote:
A>> 2) Storing attachments in seperate drectory or in message
BBTE>I've tried both. If the attachment is in the message body,
BBTE>sometimes I can recover from the problem by forwarding the
BBTE>message to myself.
I've found
Hi Bats,
I was directed to this list by an automatic bot
at bat ;]
I am a long-time user of The Bat! - a
single-user on a Sony laptop running
Win98. No MS other than the OS. No Norton.
Recently because I was unhappy with Opera's upgrade, I wanted to check
the userworthiness of Mozilla and so d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi mm,
@12-Sep-2002, 21:22 -0400 (02:22 UK time) mm Meister [MM] in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
MM> ... I discovered their really nice kill filter. It ... allows
MM> killing by word or phrase in the body of the email message.
..
I moved and have a new cable internet provider. When I try to check
mail with TB!, it wants do connect to my old ISP. I've changed the
SMTP server in Properties. What else do I do to get it to go to the
new provider?
Thanks,
Jeanny
--
Jeanny House
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rock Springs, Wyoming
The
Hi Batpeople,
What filter mechanisms do I use to detect HTML mail?
--
Be Well, Sudip Pokhrel
Sudip Kathmandu-NP.
___PGP Key ID: 0xD93F5185
TB! v1.61 on XP Pro| http://pgpkeys.mit.edu
P4-1.6Ghz 256MB RAM|
___
Hi Jeanny,
On Friday, September 13, 2002 your local time, (08:08 my local time),
you wrote:
> I moved and have a new cable internet provider. When I try to check
> mail with TB!, it wants do connect to my old ISP. I've changed the
> SMTP server in Properties. What else do I do to get it to go t
Hi Sudip,
On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 08:29:44 +0545, you wrote:
> What filter mechanisms do I use to detect HTML mail?
HTML is put into emails in two main ways (that I know of), inline, and via
attachment. You can filter for inline by searching the kludges for
"Content-Type: text/html"... you cannot s
On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 08:37:39 +0545, "Sudip Pokhrel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> Hi Jeanny,
>
> On Friday, September 13, 2002 your local time, (08:08 my local time),
> you wrote:
>
> > I moved and have a new cable internet provider. When I try to check
> > mail with TB!, it wants do connect to m
Hello tbudl-bounces
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, you wrote
> The charter.net connection is one of those "always on" things, so I
> don't even know where to find it in Windows XP to make sure it's set as
> my default connection.
> I can't get The Bat! to find it so that it will go get my
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 23:47:46 -0400, "ETM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hello tbudl-bounces
>
> On Thursday, September 12, 2002, you wrote
>
>
> > The charter.net connection is one of those "always on" things, so I
> > don't even know where to find it in Windows XP to make sure it's set as
> > my
Hi Jonathan,
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 22:00 your local time, (Friday, 08:45
my local time), you wrote:
> HTML is put into emails in two main ways (that I know of), inline,
> and via attachment. You can filter for inline by searching the
> kludges for "Content-Type: text/html"...you cannot
Hi Sudip,
On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 11:35:26 +0545, you wrote:
> > HTML is put into emails in two main ways (that I know of), inline,
> > and via attachment. You can filter for inline by searching the
> > kludges for "Content-Type: text/html"...you cannot search for it if
> > it is done via attachment
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 8:31:01 PM you wrote:
JH> However, it has always worked better for me to put my local provider's
JH> name in as the SMTP server. So, for my old connection, the SMTP server
JH> read: smtp.sweetwaterhsa.net and the POP3 server was fastmail.fm.
Try checking your authe
Hallo Jeanny,
On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 02:23:13 UTGMT (13-9-02, 4:23 +0200GMT, where I
live), you wrote:
JH> I moved and have a new cable internet provider. When I try to
JH> check mail with TB!, it wants do connect to my old ISP.
Tell it not to use a dial-up connection.
Options -> Network and Admi
Hello Eddy!
On Thursday, September 12, 2002 at 9:38:37 PM you wrote:
> In the case of JPEG attachments, clicking the little tab at the bottom
> of the window that allows you to view the image results in nothing
> but a blank pane when the attachment is "corrupt".
I've seen that with Eddy's zipp
91 matches
Mail list logo
