Thunderbird asks me to migrate my keys, and I am not
sure, if I should not wait a few more days.
Whatever you choose, a warning: set a strong master password for
Thunderbird before doing the migration. Otherwise Thunderbird stores
your private key unencrypted and there is no warning about the
Hello Nico,
You cannot use gpg for public key operations but for secret key ops.
Please follow the instructions for smartcards (no smartcard daemon needed
obviously):
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:OpenPGP:Smartcards
Then you can use the external gpg with your ~/.gnupg for decryption and
Thunderbird 78 is in the repos for quite some time now. Can anyone
please explain me what is the best way to use GPG now for email encryption?
I read that Archlinux aims to use the system wide gpg keyring instead of
thunderbirds builtin store. Is that still the case and is that
implemented yet? Th
On 09.11.20 17:27, Jens John wrote:
Just don't bother with Arch's release cycle and use Mozilla's build, either
directly (with auto updates) or through
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/thunderbird-bin/.
That's what I did not. I uninstalled the thunderbird package completely
and used Mozill
On Tue Nov 10, 2020 at 6:44 PM EST, karx via arch-general wrote:
> There is already a quite lengthy discussion about this issue going on on
> the mailing list.
Apologies. I looked at the wrong archive.
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 5:02 PM Steven Guikal via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking at the thunderbird package, and the reported version is
> 68.12.0-1 which is rather outdated. Trying to install the package also
> installs the outdated version. However, looking
Hi,
I'm looking at the thunderbird package, and the reported version is
68.12.0-1 which is rather outdated. Trying to install the package also
installs the outdated version. However, looking at the PKGBUILD it's
78.4.1. Why is this the case?
> Can this at least be built and placed to "testing"? This would offer at
> least some way to easily get pending security updates installed without
> manual compiling.
Just don't bother with Arch's release cycle and use Mozilla's build, either
directly (with auto updates) or through
https://au
On 08.11.20 07:18, Archange via arch-general wrote:
anthraxx did update the PKGBUILD and we are testing the build but currently for
instance I’m unable to decrypt messages using the external GnuPG feature
(reported upstream), and there is also a build issue with system bzip2 (I used
the vendor
Hello,
Thunderbird allows you to use GnuPG for private key operations if you
can’t/don’t want to import your private key into Thunderbird. This is
a feature lot of us need, because if you use a smartcard-like hardware
solution (Yubikey, Nitrokey, any PGP smartcard…) that’s the only
solution (
On 11/8/20 2:12 PM, Archange via arch-general wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/11/2020 00:05, Peter via arch-general wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>>> anthraxx did update the PKGBUILD and we are testing the build but currently
>>> for instance I’m unable to decrypt messages using the external GnuPG
>>> feature (rep
Hi,
On 09/11/2020 00:05, Peter via arch-general wrote:
Hello,
anthraxx did update the PKGBUILD and we are testing the build but
currently for instance I’m unable to decrypt messages using the
external GnuPG feature (reported upstream), and there is also a build
issue with system bzip2 (I use
Hello,
anthraxx did update the PKGBUILD and we are testing the build but
currently for instance I’m unable to decrypt messages using the
external GnuPG feature (reported upstream), and there is also a build
issue with system bzip2 (I used the vendored one instead, but that’s
not what we want
Hi,
Le 8 novembre 2020 01:59:07 GMT+04:00, Bjoern Franke via arch-general
a écrit :
>Hi,
>
>> I have not thoroughly tested through things on the build yet, though.
>> I have never used thunderbird much, so I'm not sure I would be the best
>> person to test and ensure all of it's features work ri
Hi,
> I have not thoroughly tested through things on the build yet, though.
> I have never used thunderbird much, so I'm not sure I would be the best
> person to test and ensure all of it's features work right. I do want
> to however verify that removing the newly unsupported flags isn't
> breakin
t 29 13:57:35 CET 2020
> > To:
> > Cc: Morten Linderud
> > Subject: Re: [arch-general] Thunderbird 78
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 01:51:23PM +0100, Geo Kozey via arch-general wrote:
> > > > From: Kevin Morris
> > > > With the upda
> From: Morten Linderud via arch-general
> Sent: Thu Oct 29 13:57:35 CET 2020
> To:
> Cc: Morten Linderud
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Thunderbird 78
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 01:51:23PM +0100, Geo Kozey via arch-general wrote:
> > > From: Kevin Mor
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 01:51:23PM +0100, Geo Kozey via arch-general wrote:
> > From: Kevin Morris
> > With the update, TB is implementing PGP by themselves without gnupg
> > for internal PGP usage. This is quite a large change, security-wise,
> > and could result in encryption/signing being broke
> From: Kevin Morris
> Sent: Thu Oct 29 00:28:04 CET 2020
> To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Thunderbird 78
>
>
> Could you guys reference the security patches that Arch is
> critically missing out on by delaying this update? I'
Hi,
> Yes, it's taking longer than usual. But the good news is, after this
> update, I doubt Mozilla will be modifying their PGP implementation
> anytime soon, and thus won't need such close review.
To be honest, it's somehow irritating to stick on a version because
somebody may find an impleme
Could you guys reference the security patches that Arch is
critically missing out on by delaying this update? I've noticed
a couple of you speaking on that, but not actually citing
any concrete problem areas.
With the update, TB is implementing PGP by themselves without gnupg
for internal PGP usag
> From: Maarten de Vries via arch-general
> Sent: Wed Oct 28 12:20:45 CET 2020
> To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
> Cc: Maarten de Vries
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Thunderbird 78
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 at 23:26, Bjoern Franke via arch-general <
> arc
Le 28/10/2020 à 15:20, Maarten de Vries via arch-general a écrit :
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 at 23:26, Bjoern Franke via arch-general <
> arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> Am 27.10.20 um 23:12 schrieb Javier via arch-general:
>>> I really hope not, I prefer to wait than having to build TB on ever
On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 at 23:26, Bjoern Franke via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Am 27.10.20 um 23:12 schrieb Javier via arch-general:
> > I really hope not, I prefer to wait than having to build TB on every
> release. Besides, current version works just fine...
> >
>
> There a
Am 27.10.20 um 23:12 schrieb Javier via arch-general:
> I really hope not, I prefer to wait than having to build TB on every release.
> Besides, current version works just fine...
>
There are also bin-packages so you don't have build it really.
Best Regards
Bjoern
gt;> To:
>> Cc: Bjoern Franke
>> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Thunderbird 78
>>
>> I've switched now to 78.4.0 (from AUR) and it seems at lot of bugs of
>> the first 78.x releases are gone.
>>
>> And even Ubuntu ships 78.x now, so switching
> From: Bjoern Franke via arch-general
> Sent: Tue Oct 27 14:35:38 CET 2020
> To:
> Cc: Bjoern Franke
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Thunderbird 78
>
> I've switched now to 78.4.0 (from AUR) and it seems at lot of bugs of
> the first 78.x releases are gone.
>
Hi,
>>
>> Upstream requested all distros to not ship Thunderbird 78 until 78.2 is
>> released:
>> https://twitter.com/mozthunderbird/status/1284418789153497090
>>
>> Yours sincerely
>>
>> G. K.
>>
>
> Since upstream is now on version 78.3.3 and the message about upgrading
> (on release notes) h
On 8/15/20 2:38 PM, Geo Kozey wrote:
From: Franck STAUFFER
Sent: Sat Aug 15 09:32:51 CEST 2020
To: karx via arch-general
Subject: Re: [arch-general] Thunderbird 78
Shouldn't it be the opposite?
This is not Debian Stable, packages should be up-to
> Is it possible to update it in [testing] at least?
This version is not an “upgradeable” release, as stated by the
upstream. Not considered “next version” in the upgrades sequence. The
next version after 68.11 is 78.2, which is not released yet.
Hypothetically [testing] could provide that rel
>
> From: Franck STAUFFER
> Sent: Sat Aug 15 09:32:51 CEST 2020
> To: karx via arch-general
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Thunderbird 78
>
>
> Shouldn't it be the opposite?
> This is not Debian Stable, packages should be
Is it possible to update it in [testing] at least?
Le 15/08/2020 à 09:52, Archange via arch-general a écrit :
Le 15 août 2020 11:32:51 GMT+04:00, Franck STAUFFER
a écrit :
Shouldn't it be the opposite?
This is not Debian Stable, packages should be up-to-date and if people
want older package
Le 15 août 2020 11:32:51 GMT+04:00, Franck STAUFFER
a écrit :
>Shouldn't it be the opposite?
>This is not Debian Stable, packages should be up-to-date and if people
>want older package they have to package it themselves in AUR.
>Am I wrong?
Not when a feature expected by many Arch users is b
Shouldn't it be the opposite?
This is not Debian Stable, packages should be up-to-date and if people
want older package they have to package it themselves in AUR.
Am I wrong?
On 8/15/20 5:27 AM, karx via arch-general wrote:
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 9:45 PM mpan wrote:
Is there any reason the p
Am 15.08.20 um 05:39 schrieb Kusoneko:
> On August 15, 2020 3:27:50 AM UTC, karx via arch-general
> wrote:
>> couldn't we package thunderbird 78 in
>> the AUR for people who absolutely need 78,
>
> Sure, go ahead and do that if you want.
>
There is thunderbird-bin in the AUR which repackages t
On August 15, 2020 3:27:50 AM UTC, karx via arch-general
wrote:
>couldn't we package thunderbird 78 in
>the AUR for people who absolutely need 78,
Sure, go ahead and do that if you want.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 9:45 PM mpan wrote:
> > Is there any reason the package is stuck to version 68?
> The reason is given on the very top of the page you have linked.
>
Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't we package thunderbird 78 in
something like testing or the AUR for people who absolut
> Is there any reason the package is stuck to version 68?
The reason is given on the very top of the page you have linked.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 2020-08-14 21:12 -0400, M Piles wrote:
|
| | | OpenPGP functionality for
| | | Thunderbird 78 is still work in
| | | progress, and is disabled by
| | | default in the initial 78.0
| | | release.
| |
| | 78+ versions do not support Enigmail
| | anymore it seems...
|
| Looking at the relea
>> At this time, users of the Enigmail Add-on should not update to Thunderbird
>> 78.
>> OpenPGP functionality for Thunderbird 78 is still work in progress, and is
>> disabled by default in the initial 78.0 release. See the wiki for how to
>> enable and help with testing.
> I heavily rely on gp
On 8/14/20 4:41 PM, Xorg via arch-general wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thunderbird 78 is available since 1 month
> (https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/78.0/releasenotes).
> Is there any reason the package is stuck to version 68? Can someone update
> this package?
>
> Thank in advance.
BTW, by l
Hi,
Thunderbird 78 is available since 1 month
(https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/78.0/releasenotes).
Is there any reason the package is stuck to version 68? Can someone
update this package?
Thank in advance.
Il 29/10/2017 16:10, Ryan Petris via arch-general ha scritto:
> On 10/29/2017 09:34 AM, Guus Snijders via arch-general wrote:
>>
>> Just a wild guess, but you probably have a display filter active in
>> Thunderbird...
>>
>> My first thought was about the protocol (pop3 vs imap), but since the mails
Hi,
Under view, menu, there should be an opsion to show read messages. HTH.
Matthew
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From: Giovanni Santini via arch-general
Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2017 8:44 AM
To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
Cc: Giovanni Santini
Subject: [arch-general] Thunderbird
On 10/29/2017 09:34 AM, Guus Snijders via arch-general wrote:
> Op 29 okt. 2017 13:44 schreef "Giovanni Santini via arch-general" <
> arch-general@archlinux.org>:
>
> Hello everyone,
> I have a weird issue.
> My uni e-mail uses Office 365 as e-mail provider; I've added it in
> Thunderbird, but I ca
Op 29 okt. 2017 13:44 schreef "Giovanni Santini via arch-general" <
arch-general@archlinux.org>:
Hello everyone,
I have a weird issue.
My uni e-mail uses Office 365 as e-mail provider; I've added it in
Thunderbird, but I can see only unread e-mails. All the read one are not
appearing in my inbox.
Hello everyone,
I have a weird issue.
My uni e-mail uses Office 365 as e-mail provider; I've added it in
Thunderbird, but I can see only unread e-mails. All the read one are not
appearing in my inbox.
However, if I `cat` the INBOX file, I can see the e-mails and if I mark
them as unread from somewh
Hello,
since the last thunderbird update I cannot create valid new meeting
dates in the integrated calendar (lightning), i.e. I cannot edit the
time of the meeting.
Kind regards
Peter
Javier Vasquez wrote:
> However, inside the company, I need to setup manually under TB:
>
> SOCKS Host: <...> Port: <...>
>
> As SOCKS v5. Where the socks host is the same as the other proxy
> hosts, but its socks port must be different than the rest.
>
> I don't use any DE, but I have some
Hi,
I'm familiar with proxy envirnoment variables such as (both lower and
upper case versions):
use_proxy
soap_use_proxy
http_proxy
https_proxy
ftp_proxy
rsync_proxy
no_proxy
all_proxy
Thunderbird at least pay attention to some of them, and honestly,
before I haven't needed anything else.
Howev
[2013-09-19 15:35:20 -0400] David Rosenstrauch:
> Having one small issue with the new Thunderbird (v24.0) upgrade.
Discussing bugs on this list is pointless; please do not do it. Rather,
submit a bug report to our tracker or, better yet, upstream's. This is
the only way anything will ever get fixe
Having one small issue with the new Thunderbird (v24.0) upgrade.
On one of the IMAP accounts I use, all the mailboxes are set up as
children of Inbox. Apparently in the new version of Thunderbird, when
I'm looking at "Unread Folders" in that account, the unread message
count displayed is the
On 03/17/2010 10:37 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
Likewise, I have 2 imaps configured with ~ 60 folders total. I just use
the
inboxes for the imap itself and then use the normal threaded view and/or sort by
sender and move messages into their respective folders. I haven't worked with
seive
On 03/17/2010 09:41 AM, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
> I'm having a little annoyance with TBird 3, and was wondering if anyone
> was experiencing the same thing and/or had a workaround.
>
> I have a large tree of folders in TBird, from 2 different IMAP accounts.
> So I use the "Unread Folders" view,
On 03/17/2010 10:46 AM, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 03/17/2010 04:41 PM, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I'm having a little annoyance with TBird 3, and was wondering if anyone
was experiencing the same thing and/or had a workaround.
I have a large tree of folders in TBird, from 2 different IMAP accounts.
S
On 03/17/2010 10:46 AM, Ionut Biru wrote:
maybe is not a matter of configs. maybe this is really a bug and should
be submitted upstream.
Could be. If so, though, I'd like to get some more info on the problem
first.
Anyone else experiencing this issue with TBird automagically selecting a
di
On 03/17/2010 04:41 PM, David Rosenstrauch wrote:
I'm having a little annoyance with TBird 3, and was wondering if anyone
was experiencing the same thing and/or had a workaround.
I have a large tree of folders in TBird, from 2 different IMAP accounts.
So I use the "Unread Folders" view, in conju
I'm having a little annoyance with TBird 3, and was wondering if anyone
was experiencing the same thing and/or had a workaround.
I have a large tree of folders in TBird, from 2 different IMAP accounts.
So I use the "Unread Folders" view, in conjunction with the
mail.check_all_imap_folders_for
Le 19/12/2009 21:25, Magnus Therning a écrit :
>> May this be related to a GTK theme or something like this?
>
> How would I test this? What combination of TB theme and GTK theme are you
> using?
Default TB theme, GTK theme: Aurora. My window manager is Awesome; I'm
not using KDE, Gnome, XFCE or
On 18/12/09 12:30, Thomas Jost wrote:
> Le 18/12/2009 08:33, Magnus Therning a écrit :
[..]
>> That's the add-on I'm using at home. Do note that the reports of
>> incompatibility between lightning and enigmail are fully true, i.e. have
>> both add-ons enabled and you'll loose some text in your me
Le 19/12/2009 10:00, David C. Rankin a écrit :
> On 12/18/2009 06:30 AM, Thomas Jost wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I'm the maintainer of the enigmail package on AUR, and I've contributed
>> x86_64 builds of Enigmail since the 0.95.7 release.
>>
>> The .xpi on the website is built using the AUR package,
On 12/18/2009 06:30 AM, Thomas Jost wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I'm the maintainer of the enigmail package on AUR, and I've contributed
> x86_64 builds of Enigmail since the 0.95.7 release.
>
> The .xpi on the website is built using the AUR package, so both are good ;)
>
>
Thomas,
Thank yo
On 12/18/2009 01:33 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
Go tohttp://enigmail.mozdev.org/download/index.php you'll be able to
put in the combination "linux (x86_64)" and "Thunderbird 3.0" (thanks
to a fellow Arch user it seems :-)
That's the add-on I'm using at home. Do note that the reports of
incompat
Le 18/12/2009 08:33, Magnus Therning a écrit :
> Go to http://enigmail.mozdev.org/download/index.php you'll be able to
> put in the combination "linux (x86_64)" and "Thunderbird 3.0" (thanks
> to a fellow Arch user it seems :-)
Hi there,
I'm the maintainer of the enigmail package on AUR, and I've
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 5:24 AM, David C. Rankin
wrote:
> On 12/17/2009 08:02 PM, Brendan Long wrote:
>>
>> If you go to Tools -> Addons, there will be a "Recommended" page. I just
>> scrolled down and Enigmail was #2 on the list.
>>
>
> I bet you have an i686 box. I think I'm bitten by the x86_6
On 12/17/2009 08:02 PM, Brendan Long wrote:
If you go to Tools -> Addons, there will be a "Recommended" page. I just
scrolled down and Enigmail was #2 on the list.
I bet you have an i686 box. I think I'm bitten by the x86_64 problem. Because I too have
it as the #2 recommended addon, but aft
On 12/17/2009 04:55 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> On 12/15/2009 06:30 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
>> It is required if you want to sign/encrypt emails using GnuPG/PGP, TB
>> can only handle certificate based sign/encrypt on its own.
>>
>
> How are you guys getting enigmail installed with TB 3.X? Ever
On 12/18/2009 01:55 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 12/15/2009 06:30 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
It is required if you want to sign/encrypt emails using GnuPG/PGP, TB
can only handle certificate based sign/encrypt on its own.
How are you guys getting enigmail installed with TB 3.X? Every time I
On 12/15/2009 06:30 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
It is required if you want to sign/encrypt emails using GnuPG/PGP, TB
can only handle certificate based sign/encrypt on its own.
How are you guys getting enigmail installed with TB 3.X? Every time I try and
install it, it tells me that it is inco
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Ionut Biru wrote:
> On 12/15/2009 01:11 PM, Paulo Santos wrote:
>>
>> Hello list,
>>
>> After doing the last Thunderbird update from 3.0-1 to 3.0-2 (x86_64),
>> with the added Lightning add-on, my menus don't work very well [1]. If I
>> disable either Lightning or
On 12/15/2009 01:11 PM, Paulo Santos wrote:
Hello list,
After doing the last Thunderbird update from 3.0-1 to 3.0-2 (x86_64),
with the added Lightning add-on, my menus don't work very well [1]. If I
disable either Lightning or Enigmail they work, they just don't work
when the add-ons are loaded
Hello list,
After doing the last Thunderbird update from 3.0-1 to 3.0-2 (x86_64),
with the added Lightning add-on, my menus don't work very well [1]. If I
disable either Lightning or Enigmail they work, they just don't work
when the add-ons are loaded together.
I've started up Thunderbird from th
2009/10/2 Aaron Griffin :
> You can do this, FYI, you don't need special permissions to remove
> files from /srv/ftp.
>
> Just be careful :)
Ok, fixed.
--
Andrea `bash` Scarpino
Arch Linux Developer
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
> 2009/10/2 Aaron Griffin :
>> I cleaned them up manually, and everything should fix itself, I believe
>>
> Please Aaron remove thunderbird -4 packages too, I uploaded
> thunberbird-i18n without uppercase in pkgnames
You can do this, FYI, you
2009/10/2 Aaron Griffin :
> I cleaned them up manually, and everything should fix itself, I believe
>
Please Aaron remove thunderbird -4 packages too, I uploaded
thunberbird-i18n without uppercase in pkgnames
--
Andrea `bash` Scarpino
Arch Linux Developer
Pierre Schmitz a écrit :
> Am Freitag 02 Oktober 2009 19:21:54 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
>
>> I believe
>>
>
> +1 for a "use only lower case in pkgname" policy
>
>
This policy has always been there, no?
Besides:
1. This is something that "namcap PKGBUILD" would have picked up.
2. In vim
Am Freitag 02 Oktober 2009 19:21:54 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
> I believe
+1 for a "use only lower case in pkgname" policy
--
Pierre Schmitz, http://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
>> 2009/10/2 Aaron Griffin :
>>> Yeah and I get error emails every time someone visits that page, so
>>> thanks for the spam :)
>>>
>>> Let me know which ones are the keepers and I'll d
2009/10/2 Aaron Griffin :
> Yeah, I think this is a goof in the backend scripts somewhere. Looks
> like all the capitalized versions are -2 and the lowercase are -3,
> correct?
Yes, I read only lowercase in PKGBUILD
--
Andrea `bash` Scarpino
Arch Linux Developer
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
> 2009/10/2 Aaron Griffin :
>> Yeah and I get error emails every time someone visits that page, so
>> thanks for the spam :)
>>
>> Let me know which ones are the keepers and I'll delete the others from
>> the DB so I stop getting mails
> I to
2009/10/2 Aaron Griffin :
> Yeah and I get error emails every time someone visits that page, so
> thanks for the spam :)
>
> Let me know which ones are the keepers and I'll delete the others from
> the DB so I stop getting mails
I touched nothing on thunderbird-spell -2 and -3! I swear!
I think -2
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Stefan Husmann
wrote:
> Andrea Scarpino schrieb:
>>
>> On 02/10/2009, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>>>
>>> See:
>>>
>>> http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-commits/2009-October/062928.html
>>>
>>> Giovanni, I hate to have to point fingers here, but before making
Andrea Scarpino schrieb:
On 02/10/2009, Thomas Bächler wrote:
See:
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-commits/2009-October/062928.html
Giovanni, I hate to have to point fingers here, but before making such a
change to somebody else's package, it should be discussed here. Now we
have s
Thomas Bächler schrieb:
Ondřej Kučera schrieb:
I've been meaning to ask. What's going on with the thunderbird
package? Version 2.0.0.23 was released more than month ago, it isn't
usual with Arch for such a package to be left outdated for so long
(especially since it is a security update).
I
Ondřej Kučera schrieb:
Hello,
I've been meaning to ask. What's going on with the thunderbird package?
Version 2.0.0.23 was released more than month ago, it isn't usual with
Arch for such a package to be left outdated for so long (especially
since it is a security update).
I know I can use A
Hello,
I've been meaning to ask. What's going on with the thunderbird package?
Version 2.0.0.23 was released more than month ago, it isn't usual with
Arch for such a package to be left outdated for so long (especially
since it is a security update).
I know I can use ABS and rebuild it myself
Jan de Groot wrote:
Did someone try to remove the optimization flags from the mozconfig file
already? I've read a recent blogpost from a mozilla dev about
distribution changes to mozilla products where the default compiler
flags should give the best results, as every part of
thunderbird/firefox/x
2008/5/22 Alper KANAT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Once again, we came to a conclusion that thunderbird-2.0.0.14 should have
> stayed in [testing] for a while until it's stable enough to make it into
> [extra]..
>
Once again, this is a problem with thunderbird and gcc 4.3. It is not
specific to thunderb
Once again, we came to a conclusion that thunderbird-2.0.0.14 should
have stayed in [testing] for a while until it's stable enough to make it
into [extra]..
Alper KANAT
http://raptiye.org
Allan McRae yazmış:
For those wanting to work around this while waiting for an official
solution:
gcc
For those wanting to work around this while waiting for an official
solution:
gcc-42 package (i686):
http://allan.mcrae.googlepages.com/gcc-42-4.2.3-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz
gcc-42 PKGBUILD: http://allan.mcrae.googlepages.com/PKGBUILD (not x86_64
tested but I think it should work)
This installs alon
Jan de Groot wrote:
Did someone try to remove the optimization flags from the mozconfig file
already? I've read a recent blogpost from a mozilla dev about
distribution changes to mozilla products where the default compiler
flags should give the best results, as every part of
thunderbird/firefox/
the attachment problem occurs because of that it's compiled with gcc-4.3 ??
2008/5/22 Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Alper KANAT wrote:
>
>> Why don't you guys use thunderbird-branded-2.0.0.14 package on AUR ?
>>
>> Because that is built from source with gcc-4.3 so will have the same
> prob
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 23:50 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> Alper KANAT wrote:
> > Why don't you guys use thunderbird-branded-2.0.0.14 package on AUR ?
> >
> Because that is built from source with gcc-4.3 so will have the same
> problem.
Did someone try to remove the optimization flags from the mozco
Alper KANAT wrote:
Why don't you guys use thunderbird-branded-2.0.0.14 package on AUR ?
Because that is built from source with gcc-4.3 so will have the same
problem.
Why don't you guys use thunderbird-branded-2.0.0.14 package on AUR ?
2008/5/22 Petr Ullmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> Allan McRae napsal(a):
>
>> Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
I can confirm it does not h
Here it is
http://cave0.tl.krakow.pl/~ert16/thunderbird-2.0.0.12-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz
Petr Ullmann pisze:
>
>
> Allan McRae napsal(a):
>> Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Allan McRae
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
I can confirm it does not happen with the of
Allan McRae napsal(a):
Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Allan McRae
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can confirm it does not happen with the official binaries,
although the
icons do not show but that could be because I ran it from my home
directory.
I have also rebu
Xavier wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can confirm it does not happen with the official binaries, although the
icons do not show but that could be because I ran it from my home directory.
I have also rebuilt via abs to get branding and that do
Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can confirm it does not happen with the official binaries, although the
icons do not show but that could be because I ran it from my home directory.
I have also rebuilt via abs to get branding
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I can confirm it does not happen with the official binaries, although the
> icons do not show but that could be because I ran it from my home directory.
> I have also rebuilt via abs to get branding and that does not help.
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
