> It works for me, any special configuration you may have? Hrrmm.. not particularly - tho it was recently switched from XFree86 to X.org - it didn't exhibit itself until I upgraded sylpheed from a 1.x to a 2.x version, however it could have been another library upgraded at the same time.
> P.S.: Read http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities if you want > to correctly set bug severities, otherwise leave it as default (normal). "important a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a package, without rendering it completely unusable to everyone." The bug has/(had ... see on) a major impact on usability (namely the ability to act efficiently as an MUA) - when one receives heaps of spam, individually selecting non-contiguous blocks of emails is a major PITA. Selecting whole blocks and then individually toggling entries is a lot less time consuming. Sylpheed looks after a gig or two of email for me - so this is important. It did not, however, render the package unusable. Therefore I chose important. I guess what constitutes "major effect" is dependant on the functionality used by the bug reporter and given your experience with a wider user base, your assessment differs from mine. Basically - I *did* RTFM :) , but perhaps I interpreted things differently to yourself. Having said that it seems it may be in an interaction between the sylpheed application and something related to the X environment (as I'm running sylpheed over an SSH forwarded X connection on a machine that was exhibiting the problem also, and has been upgraded (packages + kernel + mobo) last night, and it does not appear to have the fault now). I will try to reproduce the bug again wholly on the machine with the executable (which was also showing the bug - it wasn't just a forward X connection thing), and then will upgrade and resubmit a list of the libraries with reportbug - perhaps this will shed light on things. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
