Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Johann Spies wrote: I use mutt. From time to time I have experimented with things like kmail, pine, evolution, thunderbird (icedove), claws, gnus and maybe some others and every time I came back to mutt. Regards Johann I also like mutt. The base mutt has become much more

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Johann Spies wrote: > I use mutt. From time to time I have experimented with things like kmail, > pine, evolution, > thunderbird (icedove), claws, gnus and maybe some others and every time I > came back to mutt. > > Regards > Johann I also like mutt. The base mutt has become much more valuable si

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Hellow! No Spam 께서 쓰시길, 《記事 全文 <20160828210616.GC2923@jens-ThinkPad-Edge-E145> 에서》: > Hi, > > So it is 12 years later; > > has someone found something working? For now i use Gnus. by the way it is hard to recomend you. It is not easy to handle. The ~/.gnus.el is changed, all the time! Since

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 08:35:12AM +0200, Johann Spies wrote: > I use mutt. From time to time I have experimented with things like kmail, > pine, evolution, > thunderbird (icedove), claws, gnus and maybe some others and every time I > came back to mutt. > +1 for mutt -H -- Henning Follmann

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Stefan writes: > ...offlineimap... That looks like it could be useful. Thank you. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

> sequentially. When you're on a metered internet connection, with only > a five-hour unmetered window in each 24, then making maximum use of > the unmetered window is important. In such a situation I think you'd want to use something like leafnode and offlineimap. Stefan

Re: Pulling mail for local access (was Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck)

into more detail on how you have / got this set up, > and/or point to resources which explain the process (well enough for > someone technically savvy to be able to pick it up)? Its not THAT hard, I've been doing it for quite a few years. I suck using fetchmail as a background daemon, w

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian writes: > But will [Gnus] download from multiple newsfeeds *simultaneously*, and > combine the feeds if you subscribe to the same group from more than > one source? I use Leafnode to transfer news to my machine and then read it locally with Gnus. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood,

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Monday 29 August 2016 07:22:46 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, August 28, 2016 05:06:16 PM No Spam wrote: > > So it is 12 years later; > > > > has someone found something working? > > So, if you expect a helpful answer, you might detail the problems that > you have with the mail clients

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian writes: > I like having newsgroups and mail in a single program. So do I. That's one of the reasons I use Gnus, -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA

Pulling mail for local access (was Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck)

On 2016-08-29 at 07:00, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 06:15:23AM -0400, brian wrote: > > [Gnus] > >> But will it download from multiple newsfeeds *simultaneously*, and >> combine the feeds if you subscribe to the same group

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Sunday, August 28, 2016 05:06:16 PM No Spam wrote: > So it is 12 years later; > > has someone found something working? So, if you expect a helpful answer, you might detail the problems that you have with the mail clients you've tried. I've used kmail for a long time, and though it has some w

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 06:15:23AM -0400, brian wrote: [Gnus] > But will it download from multiple newsfeeds *simultaneously*, and > combine the feeds if you subscribe to the same group from more than > one source? [...] TBH I never tried that, beca

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 11:11:51 +0200, you wrote: > >On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 04:59:04AM -0400, brian wrote: >> On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 23:06:16 +0200, you wrote: >> >> >Hi, >> > >> >So it is 12 years later; >> > >> >has someone found something working? >> > >> >> This will be a recommendation which mos

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 04:59:04AM -0400, brian wrote: > On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 23:06:16 +0200, you wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >So it is 12 years later; > > > >has someone found something working? > > > > This will be a recommendation which most likely nobod

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 23:06:16 +0200, you wrote: >Hi, > >So it is 12 years later; > >has someone found something working? > This will be a recommendation which most likely nobody else will support, but here we go... I like having newsgroups and mail in a single program. While there's nothing outst

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 23:06:16 +0200 No Spam wrote: > Hi, > > So it is 12 years later; > > has someone found something working? > Gmail on a web browser not good enough for you? OK, I'll vote for claws-mail as well, with the same reservation. It has bugs. But not serious ones, and curiously th

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Monday 29 August 2016 02:55:14 deloptes wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Monday 29 August 2016 02:16:09 deloptes wrote: > >> Neal P. Murphy wrote: > >> > About the time of squeeze or wheezy, kmail (and KDE for that > >> > matter) began slipping over the edge into the abyss. I finally > >> >

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 29 August 2016 02:16:09 deloptes wrote: > >> Neal P. Murphy wrote: >> > About the time of squeeze or wheezy, kmail (and KDE for that matter) >> > began slipping over the edge into the abyss. I finally found XFCE >> > which is about as simple and is as useful as KDE

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Monday 29 August 2016 02:16:09 deloptes wrote: > Neal P. Murphy wrote: > > About the time of squeeze or wheezy, kmail (and KDE for that matter) > > began slipping over the edge into the abyss. I finally found XFCE > > which is about as simple and is as useful as KDE3 was. > > KDE3 still lives a

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

I use mutt. From time to time I have experimented with things like kmail, pine, evolution, thunderbird (icedove), claws, gnus and maybe some others and every time I came back to mutt. Regards Johann -- Because experiencing your loyal love is better than life itself, my lips will praise you. (P

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Neal P. Murphy wrote: > About the time of squeeze or wheezy, kmail (and KDE for that matter) began > slipping over the edge into the abyss. I finally found XFCE which is about > as simple and is as useful as KDE3 was. KDE3 still lives and KMail is still as usable as before ... even better as bugs

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 23:06:16 +0200 No Spam wrote: > Hi, > > So it is 12 years later; > > has someone found something working? > > greets > > J More years ago, BeOS' email client was perfect for me. It use separate files and made very liberal use of BFS' equivalent of attributes to sort and

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

No Spam writes: > So it is 12 years later; To what event are you referring? Your message's header has no standard “In-Reply-To” field, so it apparently is not composed as a reply. > has someone found something working? I hope you can find an email client that correctly preserves the thread of

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Hi, So it is 12 years later; has someone found something working? greets J signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: ieee that doesn't suck

; > > I can't get any more information on how to debug this crap or what to do with > the ieee1394 device mailing list. So I'm just going to appeal the greater > population of the distrobution I am using. > > Can someone identify a currently available PCI based IEEE1394

Re: ieee that doesn't suck

; > > I can't get any more information on how to debug this crap or what to do with > the ieee1394 device mailing list. So I'm just going to appeal the greater > population of the distrobution I am using. > > Can someone identify a currently available PCI based IEEE1394

ieee that doesn't suck

o with the ieee1394 device mailing list. So I'm just going to appeal the greater population of the distrobution I am using. Can someone identify a currently available PCI based IEEE1394 card that doesn't suck? I can't run gscanbus because it crashes my system. I can't get any

Bulletin-board software that doesn't suck

My company has lots of little subgroups that often want to set up bulletin boards for single issues that last a month or so and then disappear. We want it to be * threaded * easily scalable (thousands of disjoint bulletin boards could be running on one machine, hopefully without spawning thous

Re: Inn2 + Suck: don't download all the messages

On 2004-10-23 10:02:36 -0300, Eriberto wrote: > How to make suck download all messages of a group? The suck pull 62 of > 2328 messages stored in remote group. Look at the files in /etc/suck. There should be one called sucknewsrc., which contains lines of the form: newsgroup number Ju

Re: Inn2 + Suck: don't download all the messages

Eriberto wrote: > How to make suck download all messages of a group? The suck pull 62 of > 2328 messages stored in remote group. I switched to newsx for the same reason sometime last year. I mentioned it to the maintainer and he replied back with info that it might take a while to f

Inn2 + Suck: don't download all the messages

Hello all, How to make suck download all messages of a group? The suck pull 62 of 2328 messages stored in remote group. Thanks, Eriberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 01:28:10AM -0400, Cristian Gutierrez wrote: > Brian Nelson wrote: > > [...] > > >>> Furthermore, I ran into problems with offline synchronization. > >> > >> if you are using imap, there is zero syncrhonization problems, > >> as your email and folders are only on the imap s

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:01:31 +0800, John Summerfield writes: >>But I'm not sure about IMAP support... in the past when I've >>wanted something like that I've been able to just mount the MH >>mail directory over the network, but there are Issues (to say the >>least) with trying to do that across

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson wrote: [...] >>> Furthermore, I ran into problems with offline synchronization. >> >> if you are using imap, there is zero syncrhonization problems, >> as your email and folders are only on the imap server > > Hmm? I don't use OfflineIMAP for shits and giggles, ya know. [...] I th

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Well, some of the mailers supposedly will "Synchronize" (yeah, right) > your local folder image with whatever is on the server, which would > be nice if it worked, so you could conduct interactive stuff locally > and just use the link for keeping stuff synchronized > > b

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

> Downloading the contents of imap folders goes far to defeat the purpose > of IMAP: I can read the same mail ising different IMAP clients on > different computers and across different operating systems. Well, some of the mailers supposedly will "Synchronize" (yeah, right) your local folder imag

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

> Downloading the contents of imap folders goes far to defeat the purpose > of IMAP: I can read the same mail ising different IMAP clients on > different computers and across different operating systems. Well, some of the mailers supposedly will "Synchronize" (yeah, right) your local folder imag

Re: scripts Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

> there's a gui for mh too Yes... thanks for reminding me, I was going to say something about that, for the benefit of whoever is bemoaning his mail system... it's "exmh" (formerly "xmh"), and is implemented AFAIK entirely in TCL, which can be customized to change the GUI (or blow it off the air

scripts Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

hi ya "list comm" On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > FWIW... maybe my demands are just too small, but I've been using > MH mail for... for hmmm... 25 years, now? maybe? and > because it's command-line oriented, whenever it does something I there's a gui for mh too > (Just t

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 02:08:15PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > there, I've been known to break security, implement an SUID shell > script to hack the sendmail.cf file to change the system identity That doesn't do anything. SUID/GID bits on shell scripts are ignored. -- Thomas Adam -- "Fran

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I'm not sure about IMAP support... in the past when I've wanted something like that I've been able to just mount the MH mail directory over the network, but there are Issues (to say the least) with trying to do that across the Internet... dep't. I think you have to *

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

FWIW... maybe my demands are just too small, but I've been using MH mail for... for hmmm... 25 years, now? maybe? and because it's command-line oriented, whenever it does something I don't like or doesn't do something I want, I write shell scripts to bludgeon it into submission as necessa

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I use courier-imap-ssl, I haven't seen a problem yet. I even have a > couple of folders with 15K+ messages and one with 23K+ messages. I also > have 34 folders, 15 the have sub-folders from there, one sub-folder with > 12 sub-folders in it. Can you set p

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 12:46:27PM -0400, Gregory Seidman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 01:50:15AM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote: > } On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 08:24:34PM +0200, John L Fjellstad wrote: > } > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > } > > } > >> > 6. It must have a decent expiry sys

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 12:46, Gregory Seidman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 01:50:15AM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote: > } On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 08:24:34PM +0200, John L Fjellstad wrote: > } > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > } > >> > 6. It must have a decent expiry system. > } > >> > } >

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 01:50:15AM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote: } On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 08:24:34PM +0200, John L Fjellstad wrote: } > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: } > } > >> > 6. It must have a decent expiry system. } > >> } > >> You don't need a mailclient to have a decent expiry sys

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 08:24:34PM +0200, John L Fjellstad wrote: > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> > 6. It must have a decent expiry system. > >> > >> You don't need a mailclient to have a decent expiry system if you are > >> using Maildir. Since all new mail goes into {MAILBOXN

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Why not just use an IMAP server that has one? Modify settings to taste. > > I use courier-imap-ssl, I haven't seen a problem yet. Didn't know courier-imap actually let you do autoexpire... Actually, right now I'm doing pop on my laptop. Won't be able

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > 6. It must have a decent expiry system. >> >> You don't need a mailclient to have a decent expiry system if you are >> using Maildir. Since all new mail goes into {MAILBOXNAME}/new and all >> read mail goes into {MAILBOXNAME}/cur, you can use this sc

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 12:01:52PM +0200, John L Fjellstad wrote: > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > 6. It must have a decent expiry system. > > You don't need a mailclient to have a decent expiry system if you are > using Maildir. Since all new mail goes into {MAILBOXNAME}/new and

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Sat, 2004-08-07 at 06:01, John L Fjellstad wrote: > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > 6. It must have a decent expiry system. > > You don't need a mailclient to have a decent expiry system if you are > using Maildir. Since all new mail goes into {MAILBOXNAME}/new and all > read m

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 6. It must have a decent expiry system. You don't need a mailclient to have a decent expiry system if you are using Maildir. Since all new mail goes into {MAILBOXNAME}/new and all read mail goes into {MAILBOXNAME}/cur, you can use this script to delete

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson wrote: > ... >>mutt does that for me. I think gnus can also do, I mean to test it more >>heavily some time, but the startup time is too big. > > > Must... resist... urge... to... KILL!!! http://palpatine.chez.tiscali.fr/Dilbert/CowDskArt040896.gif -- Paul

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

30+ years? Is there an > > >> email client out there that, after 30 years, still doesn't suck? > > >> ... > > >> thunderbird? Never tried it, doesn't support mailing lists from what > > >> I've heard. Most likely also suffers from t

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 11:25 -0400, Mark Roach wrote: > Have you used the imap headercache patch for mutt? I have used this on I should really read the whole thread before posting noise... and probably shouldn't have sent this one at all... -Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] w

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Thu, 2004-08-05 at 21:18 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Brian Nelson wrote: [...] > > 7. It must not be dog slow. I have big folders and I don't want to wait > >5 minutes to load them. > > Mutt suffers from 7, but it's not a big deal if you keep the number > of messages in a folder under contr

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 12:55:28PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote: > Paul Gear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Brian Nelson wrote: > >> It's 2004. Email has been around for what, 30+ years? Is there an > >> email client out there that, after 30 years, stil

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson wrote: 6. It must have a decent expiry system. 7. It must not be dog slow. I have big folders and I don't want to wait 5 minutes to load them. Mutt suffers from 7, but it's not a big deal if you keep the number of messages in a folder under control. For this I use archivemail

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> In general, Gnus expects to control everything in its mail backends, >>> so it's not surprising that it doesn't really sync with other maildir >>> programs. nnmaildir tries (which is probably why it is so sl

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Brian Nelson wrote: >> I have a few modest requirements that a mail client must meet: >> >> 1. I must be able to customize the order folders, and I don't want to >>give them retardedly ugly names to force a correct alphabetic order. >>This is very i

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> In general, Gnus expects to control everything in its mail backends, >> so it's not surprising that it doesn't really sync with other maildir >> programs. nnmaildir tries (which is probably why it is so slow) but I >> don't think it's the highest on the

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson wrote: > So now I'm seriously considering going back to mutt, but I just can't > get into it. FWIW, my mail setup[1] has evolved to mutt+offlineimap (+vim+archivemail+cron+grepmail+maildrop+subversion) and I'm pretty happy with it. The weakest link is definitly mutt. > I have a few m

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Over the years, my email usage has grown enormously. I now have 70 IMAP > folders, am subscribed to around 50 mailing lists, and receive over 2000 > emails per day. Perhaps not the answer you want, but have you considered reading the mailing lists throu

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Alvin Oga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > i assume you use different email accounts > > brian-deb for debian lists > brian-movie for movie lists > brian-security for security updates > brian-work for work related lists > > brian-save for anything you want (forever) sa

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Paul Gear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Brian Nelson wrote: >> It's 2004. Email has been around for what, 30+ years? Is there an >> email client out there that, after 30 years, still doesn't suck? >> ... >> thunderbird? Never tried it, doesn'

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Alec Berryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm going to get myself kicked in the nuts. > > I think mutt + offlineimap is what you need. > > Mutt does native Maildir support, so you won't have to screw with hard > links or whatever that gnus stuff was. Just sync it up normally. > > Google for 'mu

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Despite the latency, offlineimap seemed to work OK from Brazil, so I >> decided to make gnus switch to using a local Maildir folder. > > Did you ever try using Gnus' agent support? Yeah, that's what I meant by

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Despite the latency, offlineimap seemed to work OK from Brazil, so I > decided to make gnus switch to using a local Maildir folder. Did you ever try using Gnus' agent support? In general, Gnus expects to control everything in its mail backends, so it's

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Brian Nelson wrote: Hi Brian, understand your agony, haven't found the almighty email client, but am using Pine 4.58 quite happily: BN> 1. I must be able to customize the order folders, and I don't want to BN>give them retardedly ugly names to force a correct alphabetic o

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

Brian Nelson wrote: > It's 2004. Email has been around for what, 30+ years? Is there an > email client out there that, after 30 years, still doesn't suck? > ... > thunderbird? Never tried it, doesn't support mailing lists from what > I've heard. Most li

Re: [Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

hi ya nelson On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Brian Nelson wrote: > It's 2004. Email has been around for what, 30+ years? Is there an > email client out there that, after 30 years, still doesn't suck? it sucks because of "different users" like "different functions/featu

[Rant] The Endless Search for a Mail Client That Doesn't Suck

It's 2004. Email has been around for what, 30+ years? Is there an email client out there that, after 30 years, still doesn't suck? That's a rhetorical question. Anyone who blurts out "Mutt!" gets a swift kick in the genitals. And if anyone even tries to utter "

get-news/suck: Interruption of network connection

What happens if get-news' connection is interrupted while it is still downloading news? Does it post the already downloaded articles to the local INN? Does it update the sucknewsrc? Where does it restart the next time? -- Please don't CC me on replies! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROT

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 03:56:46PM -0800, Mark Ferlatte wrote: > Does anyone out there use ICQ under Debian? So far I've tried licq and > gaim with the ICQ plugin, and both of them have very annoying problems > (messages get lost, or messages from previous sessions get delivered > again on client s

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 02:42:51PM +0100, Petter Isaksson wrote: > Randy Orrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The problem that I've had with every ICQ client I've tried is that they > > keep my demand dialed ppp connection alive -- is there one that will > > The problem here is that the icq-

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 03:33:46PM +0100, Alex the Koala wrote (0.54): > add my two cents here: try using gaim *without* the ICQ plugin. ICQ2000b > just runs the AOL protocol which gaim handles well. Set protocol to > Oscar, auth host login.icq.com on port 5190. I'll have to keep this in mind for

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

> On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 03:56:46PM -0800, Mark Ferlatte wrote: > > Does anyone out there use ICQ under Debian? So far I've tried licq and > > gaim with the ICQ plugin, and both of them have very annoying problems > > (messages get lost, or messages from previous sessions get delivered > > again o

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Rob Weir wrote: > The thing to remember tho, is that this is AOLs fault; they keep > updating the protocol in (what seems to be) a non-backward compatible > fashion. Gotta love flag-day updates... > Arggghhh, have you seen the recent version of Mirabilis ICQ? It's not > the

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 03:56:46PM -0800, Mark Ferlatte wrote: > Does anyone out there use ICQ under Debian? So far I've tried licq and > gaim with the ICQ plugin, and both of them have very annoying problems > (messages get lost, or messages from previous sessions get delivered > again on client s

RE: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

> > Does anyone out there use ICQ under Debian? So far I've > > tried licq and gaim with the ICQ plugin, and both of them > > have very annoying problems (messages get lost, or messages > > from previous sessions get delivered again on client startup... > > this is a problem when you have 20+ mess

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Nori Heikkinen wrote: > on Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:13:09AM -0800, Paul 'Baloo' Johnson insinuated: > > > > What exactly is ytalk? > > version of it. scrolls text instead of wrapping it; doesn't show > random old english and runic characters for delete symbols on another > termi

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

on Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:13:09AM -0800, Paul 'Baloo' Johnson insinuated: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Nori Heikkinen wrote: > > > oh, i am a talk *geek*, and use it all the time on my school's student > > server. it's how i kept in touch with half my friends who were abroad > > this past semester! (ytal

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

Randy Orrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The problem that I've had with every ICQ client I've tried is that they > keep my demand dialed ppp connection alive -- is there one that will The problem here is that the icq-client needs to send keep-alive packets (every 90-120 seconds, I think), else

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 12:19:12AM -0500, dman wrote: > (FWIW UNIX had the first IM called 'talk', too bad I never see it used > anymore (in fact, I can't get it to work at school)) What about write(1)? That came before talk didn't it? And is more similar to an IM IMO. :) Pete

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Erik Andreas Fjogstad Brandstadmoen wrote: > Why not go for the original ICQ? For Java, that is. Works nicely. > http://www.icq.com/download/ftp-java.html Other than it's bloated, resource intensive, slow and buggy? -- Baloo

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Sven Hoexter wrote: > I've build a licq CVS Snapshot a few days ago and it works very well. > It supports the new protocol, has a little bit modified QT plugin etc. I've seen the new QT plugin, it seems to be in unstable, but licq is still flaking on ICQ. -- Baloo

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, dman wrote: > Doesn't [y]talk allow communicating with remote machines as well? Yes. -- Baloo

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 03:05:54AM -0500, Brian Clark wrote: > * Benjamin Sommerfeld ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 18. 2002 02:59]: > > They changed the protocol in their new Windows Client so none of the > > old clients is usable and there's no open source implementation of the > > new protocol out ye

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Brian Clark wrote: > * Benjamin Sommerfeld ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 18. 2002 02:59]: > > > The only possability to use ICQ these days in Linux is by using a ICQ > > Java applet on the ICQ page. http://lite.icq.com > > > They changed the protocol in their new Windows Client s

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Nori Heikkinen wrote: > oh, i am a talk *geek*, and use it all the time on my school's student > server. it's how i kept in touch with half my friends who were abroad > this past semester! (ytalk's even better.) What exactly is ytalk? -- Baloo

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Thu, 17 Jan 2002, Mark Ferlatte wrote: > Not suprised that it's not used much anymore, though... not too many > multi-user Unix shell hosts left around. I'm lucky to have accounts on > a couple with large enough user-bases for old school Unix communication > tools to still be useful. I really

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, dman wrote: > Sometimes it is more convenient, and other times it isn't. > (FWIW UNIX had the first IM called 'talk', too bad I never see it used > anymore (in fact, I can't get it to work at school)) Talk and write. These aren't as effective since it helps to finger to see

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Erik Andreas Fjogstad Brandstadmoen wrote: > Mark Ferlatte wrote: > > Does anyone out there use ICQ under Debian? So far I've tried licq and > > gaim with the ICQ plugin, and both of them have very annoying problems > > (messages get lost, or messages from previous sessions g

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

* Benjamin Sommerfeld ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 18. 2002 02:59]: > The only possability to use ICQ these days in Linux is by using a ICQ > Java applet on the ICQ page. http://lite.icq.com > They changed the protocol in their new Windows Client so none of the > old clients is usable and there's no

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

Mark Ferlatte wrote: > Does anyone out there use ICQ under Debian? So far I've tried licq and > gaim with the ICQ plugin, and both of them have very annoying problems > (messages get lost, or messages from previous sessions get delivered > again on client startup... this is a problem when you have

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Benjamin Sommerfeld wrote: > The only possability to use ICQ these days in Linux is by using a ICQ Java > applet on the ICQ page. http://lite.icq.com I'm still using ICQ with the old client, just not reliably. > They changed the protocol in their new Windows Client so none o

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

lcome at this point. Unfortunately, the > > suggestion to drop ICQ for another IM is not feasible, due to the > > infamous Circumstances Beyond My Control (tm). > > That and most other IMs suck more... > > --

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 04:12, Mark Ferlatte wrote: > I've been using GnomeICU for the last 4 hours, and it hasn't had the > repeated messages problem yet (after doing a couple of client restarts). > gaim and licq did it on every client restart, so maybe GnomeICU solved > my problem. The problem tha

Re: Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?

On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 11:40:37PM -0600, Nori Heikkinen wrote: | on Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:19:12AM -0500, dman insinuated: | > Sometimes it is more convenient, and other times it isn't. (FWIW | > UNIX had the first IM called 'talk', too bad I never see it used | > anymore (in fact, I can't get it to

  1   2   3   >