David Gaudine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bob Hilliard writes:
> > But most Windows mailers make you read mail on-line, which is an
> > abomination.
>
> Outlook Express requires me to go online to download messages or to upload
> replies. It does not require me to be online while reading
Bob Hilliard writes:
> But most Windows mailers make you read mail on-line, which is an
> abomination.
Outlook Express requires me to go online to download messages or to upload
replies. It does not require me to be online while reading or composing.
Neither does Eudora, as I recall. What
Pigeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I seem to be making a habit of being misunderstood at the moment!
> Sure, Linux lets you do anything you want - that's why I like it - it
> just seemed that the general philosophy was "online all the time".
> That of Windoze seems to be "OK, we'll let you be of
On 05 Nov 2002 07:55:30 -0600, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pigeon wrote:
>> ...of OE which to me is the single most important feature a mail client
>> can offer: the ability to automatically dial up, send any outgoing mail,
>> receive any incoming mail and immediately hang up.
>
>Am MU
Am Mit, 2002-11-06 um 00.15 schrieb Joshua Lee:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 07:55:30AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> > Joshua Lee writes:
> > > However, it should be pretty easy to implement a script that would run
> > > pon, fetch your mail, and run poff to disconnect once successful though.
> [...]
>
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 07:55:30AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> Joshua Lee writes:
> > However, it should be pretty easy to implement a script that would run
> > pon, fetch your mail, and run poff to disconnect once successful though.
[...]
> soon as it receives it from your MUA (e.g. mutt, gnus, et
Hello Richard,
On Nov 5, Richard Kimber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > > You mean there are email programs that can't thread? Amazing. I've run
| > > kmail, mutt, evolution and sylpheed-claws (this post). All are
| > > thread-capable.
|
| But Sylpheed is not.
Yes it is. In Claws, there's
On Tue, 5 Nov 2002 15:32:40 -0500
Joshua Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You mean there are email programs that can't thread? Amazing. I've run
> > kmail, mutt, evolution and sylpheed-claws (this post). All are
> > thread-capable.
But Sylpheed is not.
- Richard.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On November 4, 2002 08:49 pm, csj wrote:
> You mean there are email programs that can't thread? Amazing. I've run
> kmail, mutt, evolution and sylpheed-claws (this post). All are
> thread-capable.
I was already using kmail, it was actually that I didn't realize email
programs could do such a thin
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 09:49:14AM +0800, csj wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2002 16:56:26 -0500
> Levi Waldron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > And thanks from me. I was previously reading the list archives
> > rather than actually subscribing, til I realized that some email
> > programs (like kmail)
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002 16:56:26 -0500
Levi Waldron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And thanks from me. I was previously reading the list archives
> rather than actually subscribing, til I realized that some email
> programs (like kmail) are capable of threading like the archives do!
You mean there a
Hello Rob,
On Nov 5, Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| I'm kind of curious now: how common is threading among mail clients now?
Well, even my school's web-based email system has threading ... I
haven't used other than Sylpheed and mutt in forever, either, though, so
I really don't know abo
Pigeon wrote:
> ...of OE which to me is the single most important feature a mail client
> can offer: the ability to automatically dial up, send any outgoing mail,
> receive any incoming mail and immediately hang up.
Am MUA should not do this. It should just hand the mail to the MTA.
Joshua Lee w
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:55:43PM -, Pigeon wrote:
> Thanks from me as well. This stuff is not obvious to those who do not
> use a thread-aware mail client. This includes me. I've only just got a
I'm kind of curious now: how common is threading among mail clients now?
It's been a long time si
d Stealing (was: Installing debian via network)
>
>
> Michael Naumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-11-03 16:19:09 +0100]:
> > 03.11.2002 04:29:40, Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [Please start a new thread for a new question, it makes it much
> >
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:55:43PM -, Pigeon wrote:
> of OE which to me is the single most important feature a mail client can
> offer: the ability to automatically dial up, send any outgoing mail,
> receive any incoming mail and immediately hang up. This MINIMISES time
> spent CLOCKING UP PHON
On November 4, 2002 10:55 am, Pigeon wrote:
> Thanks from me as well. This stuff is not obvious to those who do not
> use a thread-aware mail client. This includes me. I've only just got a
And thanks from me. I was previously reading the list archives rather than
actually subscribing, til I real
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 04 November 2002 3:55 pm, Pigeon wrote:
> (I did have a brief look at Forte Agent but it seems to lack the feature
> of OE which to me is the single most important feature a mail client can
> offer: the ability to automatically dial up, send
- Original Message -
From: Wayne Topa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Thread Stealing (was: Installing debian via network)
> Bob Proulx([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
> > Michael Naumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-11-03 16:19:09
+0100]:
> > >
Bob Proulx([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
> Michael Naumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-11-03 16:19:09 +0100]:
> > 03.11.2002 04:29:40, Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [Please start a new thread for a new question, it makes it much easier
> > > for people to follow the list an
03.11.2002 18:59:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) wrote:
> Michael Naumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-11-03 16:19:09 +0100]:
> > 03.11.2002 04:29:40, Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [Please start a new thread for a new question, it makes it much easier
> > > for people to follow the list
03.11.2002 17:16:13, "Donald R. Spoon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -SNIP- <
>
>The "fastest" way, IMHO, is to use the Debian CDs on the SuSE computer
>and do a "clean' install. This will over-write your current SuSE install.
>
>If you have some files on your SuSE box that you might want to pres
Michael Naumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-11-03 16:19:09 +0100]:
> 03.11.2002 04:29:40, Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [Please start a new thread for a new question, it makes it much easier
> > for people to follow the list and makes it more likely that you'll get
> > an answer.]
>
> I'm
Michael Naumann wrote:
03.11.2002 04:29:40, Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-SNIP- <
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 11:10:58AM +0100, Michael Naumann wrote:
Now I have a second Box, currently running SuSe.
This box is connected via ethernet to the woody box.
What I want to do is to install debian
03.11.2002 04:29:40, Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First I want to thank for the answer.
> [Please start a new thread for a new question, it makes it much easier
> for people to follow the list and makes it more likely that you'll get
> an answer.]
I'm not sure I understand what you want t
[Please start a new thread for a new question, it makes it much easier
for people to follow the list and makes it more likely that you'll get
an answer.]
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 11:10:58AM +0100, Michael Naumann wrote:
> Now I have a second Box, currently running SuSe.
> This box is connected via
I'm in the following situation:
I have a fully functional woody installation.
On a separate partition I have all the seven cd's
and everything is set up, so that I can use dselect
without any need to insert any cd.
So far so good.
Now I have a second Box, currently running SuSe.
This box is connec
27 matches
Mail list logo
