Does everyone else get this failure notice whenever they post to the group?? ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 8:03 PM Subject: failure notice
> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at webmail1.sonnet.de. > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The users maildir is over the allowed quota (size). > > --- Below this line is a copy of the message. > > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Received: (qmail 29832 invoked by uid 1011); 19 Jul 2000 00:03:57 -0000 > Received: from ns2.sonnet.de ([212.93.6.232]) (envelope-sender <>) > by webmail1.sonnet.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP > for <>; 19 Jul 2000 00:03:57 -0000 > Received: (qmail 26146 invoked by uid 1014); 19 Jul 2000 00:03:13 -0000 > Received: from sam.julianhaight.com ([207.12.88.58]) (envelope-sender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) > by webmail2.sonnet.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 19 Jul 2000 00:03:13 -0000 > Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > by sam.julianhaight.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e6J03qP28649 > for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:03:52 -0400 > Received: from kp8.kpsnet.net (kp8.kpsnet.net [216.121.191.51]) > by sam.julianhaight.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e6J03f628510 > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:03:41 -0400 > Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > by kp8.kpsnet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA24604 > for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 02:05:50 +0200 > Received: from murphy.debian.org (murphy.debian.org [216.234.231.6]) by kp8.kpsnet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA24588 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 02:05:48 +0200 > Resent-Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 02:05:48 +0200 > Received: (qmail 20004 invoked by uid 38); 19 Jul 2000 00:03:09 -0000 > X-Envelope-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Received: (qmail 19913 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2000 00:03:02 -0000 > Received: from loomis.vermontel.net (204.164.106.19) by murphy.debian.org with SMTP; 19 Jul 2000 00:03:02 -0000 > Received: from p2400 (oldschool.vermontel.net [63.167.44.199]) by loomis.vermontel.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA67702; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:02:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: "Ethan Pierce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Frank Copeland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: How stable is WINE? > Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:01:38 -0400 > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Priority: 3 > X-Msmail-Priority: Normal > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 > X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 > Resent-Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org > X-Mailing-List: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/99612 > X-Loop: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Precedence: list > Resent-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-SpamCop-REPORTSPAM: http://members.spamcop.net/sc?action=report&id=1932605 > X-SpamCop-Bytes: 16976543 > > In my opinion WINE isnt all its cracked up to be, but better than it has > been in the past. If you want to run windows apps in linux, install vmware > (www.vmware.com). It runs VERY fast depending on how much virtual ram you > can afford to allocate. I use 128mb for my virtual machines. Ive even had > execellent results with fullscreen windows media player under vmware. > > -Ethan > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frank Copeland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> > Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:32 PM > Subject: Re: How stable is WINE? > > > > Cameron Matheson wrote: > > > > >I'm waiting for the new Debian to come out, and I need some information > > >about WINE. In Potato, how stable is WINE? > > > > In my experience the wine currently in potato is as stable as any version > of > > wine I've used, and better than most. However, it is classified as alpha > > software for a very good reason. It comes nowhere near running all windows > > software. Each monthly snapshot improves some aspects but often breaks > > something that worked previously; very much a two steps forward one step > > back process. > > > > >Does it run better than windoze? Also, What's the speed like, is it as > > >fast as the app would run in windoze? > > > > No and no. If it works at all with a given application then it works well > > enough, but you may have to work around an annoying bug or two (like > > shift-clicking the mouse occasionally freezing the app or even crashing > X). > > Speed is sufficient considering the source is full of debugging code and > not > > optimised in any way. > > > > If you are looking for a general replacement for windows that runs > whatever > > windows runs then expect to be disappointed. If you have a specific > > application you need to use then the only way to find out if it will run > > under wine is to try it. If you have trouble then ask for help on > > <news:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine>. > > > > Frank > > > > > > -- > > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < > /dev/null > > > > > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > >
