The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Harry on Wednesday 02/Aug/2006, @12:16
|
Thunderbird is one of my (few) not KDE native applications.
My reason? Poor HTML support in KMail.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Carsten Niehaus on Wednesday 02/Aug/2006, @12:59
|
|
I guess you mean "poor html-composing-support in KMail"? If so, the more specific you are the better.
Here is a list of all open KMail-composer bugs with "html" in the subject.
url too long
Please add comments to there bugs to help the KMail-devels fixing the bugs and therefore your problems.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Harry on Wednesday 02/Aug/2006, @13:04
|
You're right.
But indeed, that's the major problem. Composing. And specifically not a new message (this works rather well), but replying on a message with a HTML body.
KMail just pastes the html text in the composing window, rather than render the orginal HTML part.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Carsten Niehaus on Wednesday 02/Aug/2006, @13:43
|
Is that somehow related to
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65646
or
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=121849
If not, please open a new bugreport.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by birthday child :P on Wednesday 02/Aug/2006, @15:45
|
for me, Kontact/Kmail wasn't broken the whole KDE 3.5.x releases. i am also using imap folders. just, spam-filtering is strange, but i didn't set it up very well.. maybe i have to use APOP protocol, dunno.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Alistair John Strachan on Thursday 03/Aug/2006, @03:09
|
You probably don't have enough emails in one directory to provoke it.
I've got directories of 6000+ emails and it doesn't handle these very well.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Gralbe on Thursday 03/Aug/2006, @17:20
|
> I've got directories of 6000+ emails and it doesn't handle these very well.
I've got directories of 8500+ emails and I'm not seeing a problem (for the entire 3.5 series).
Which IMAP server are you connecting to? I'm currently connecting to a courier imap server.
Not trying to say you aren't having problems, but it's certainly not as simple as the number of messages.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Alistair John Strachan on Friday 04/Aug/2006, @15:13
|
Courier IMAP. I'm certain this has nothing to do with the server, it happened on different IMAP servers too.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by parena on Thursday 03/Aug/2006, @03:28
|
I haven't had any of your problems with KMail during 3.5, actually. And I only use IMAP: one smaller one and one that now contains 241M of mail. My wife's IMAP account even contains 426M of mail.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Lee on Thursday 03/Aug/2006, @03:30
|
I was worried about IMAP support at first too; it looked VERY flaky, and I was disappointed to see that dIMAP was no better. BUT, I tried it a bit later, and worked at it a bit, and it's been fine now for a LONG time. I've been using it as my only mail client (and purely IMAP) for... as long as I can remember basically, using it MANY times a day, with many folders, some of which have thousands of mails, and many big attachments, with only the rarest of hanging troubles. These are fixed by just running pkill on kmail and kio_imap. All in all, it's far better than the IMAP support in evolution, thunderbird, etc. I'd recommend giving it another go. I'm using courier-imap on the server, if it helps.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by Alistair John Strachan on Thursday 03/Aug/2006, @15:23
|
As am I. Since the crashes occur on two PCs (different architectures, too) it seems unlikely that it's my toolchain. I'm fairly confident this bug exists, you've just been lucky.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: KMail Still Broken?
by gnulinuxman on Saturday 05/Aug/2006, @13:45
|
I've been using KMail for a year and I still like it, even the current version. I haven't had any crashes, and it's super-fast--way faster than Thunderbird (ugh, that one is S-L-O-W).
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|