Linda Walsh said the following on 05/08/2013 03:27 AM:
but one I didn't think Anton would take personally.
Anton takes very little personally .... a few days later. Linda: you report a lot of technical problems with your own systems to the list. I must admit it makes me wonder why you have these problems and and others, not least of all myself, don't. I re-read your problems with later versions of T'Bird. I've been happily using it since Mozilla calved it off as its own product. As I've commented before, I use fetchmail to download onto a 'server' and access via IMAP from whatever workstation I'm at (which might even be over a ssh tunnel). Yes, I could configure all or specific folders to download from the IMAP server to a local cache but I've chose not to use that configuration option. Note: Its a configuration option. Yes T'Bird in IMAP mode will download the header/envelope information. (And cache it for the next startup) How else can it display that information - subject, date, from, status - and the number of messages in the folders? Please don't confuse downloading headers with downloading body. Does T'Bird download the body? Damn right it does! How else can you read the message! Does it cache that? Apparently so: move up and down the list when you have 3-panel set up or go to another folder then come back. No delay in viewing a message you've already viewed. Does the cache expire? Of course it does. Can you configure it? Of course you can: user_pref("browser.cache.disk.capacity", 358400); user_pref("browser.cache.disk.smart_size_cached_value", 204800); There are other cache settings too - see the documentation. Of course you may not have this capability in old versions such as 2.00.0.24, these are from 17.0.5 Problems? Yes I have lots of them! They all get back to the plugins and extensions, mostly that the developers don't keep up to date. So then, increasingly confused as to your reasoning why you are stuck on 2.0.0.24 when so many of us are on 17.x I see you mention that your X isn't fast enough. That's why you're on 2.0.0.24? You also mentioned the footprint of T'Bird - presumably some of that is caching, but you might be confusing that with indexing. That was where I ROTFLMAO'd. Heck, we've just been discussing 1TB /tmp files and you're worried about T'Bird caching headers! But then you mentioned
I'm hoping to get 'X' to run faster
Well it that's your problem then it isn't really a T'Bird problem. But I don't think so. The crippled box from the Closet of Anxieties has an 800MHz single threaded CPU: $ lscpu Architecture: i686 CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 1 On-line CPU(s) list: 0 Thread(s) per core: 1 Core(s) per socket: 1 Socket(s): 1 Vendor ID: GenuineIntel CPU family: 6 Model: 11 Stepping: 1 CPU MHz: 801.794 BogoMIPS: 1603.58 It has just 1G of memory, uses a crippled SiS video chip on the mobo ... Its running an un-hacked (part from getting the SiS video to work) 12.3 on a 200G disk df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on devtmpfs 479M 32K 478M 1% /dev tmpfs 494M 0 494M 0% /dev/shm tmpfs 494M 3.3M 491M 1% /run /dev/mapper/system-suse--root 5.0G 2.0G 3.1G 40% / tmpfs 494M 0 494M 0% /sys/fs/cgroup /dev/sda1 152M 59M 86M 41% /boot /dev/mapper/system-HOME 1.0G 110M 915M 11% /home /dev/mapper/system-TMP 1.7G 33M 1.6G 2% /tmp /dev/mapper/system-suse--var 2.0G 312M 1.7G 16% /var tmpfs 494M 3.3M 491M 1% /var/run /dev/mapper/system-suse--share 2.0G 1.4G 672M 68% /usr/share tmpfs 494M 3.3M 491M 1% /var/lock But it runs both (current versions) T'Bird and Firefox at the same time both with quite acceptable performance. If you were local I'd cart this box over to you and let you use it to see how good an unmodified opensuse desktop can be and get you over your problems with poor X performance (presumably on much better hardware than this piece of junk) and that T'Bird doesn't need to have the kind of problems you describe that are preventing your moving to an up to date version and hence getting a "reply-to-list" button. Yes, I know this is an old crippled box I'm describing. That's my point. Yes, I know that at my local Best Buy I can get a an Acer or Toshiba or, heavens forbid!, a HP with a 4-core CPU, maybe as much as 6-8G of memory and a 650G to 1TB disk for about $350[1]. Assuming I get that far into the store and haven't been persuaded to spend that on a camera, phone or tablet or large screen TV ... Just for the heck, I took a USB stick in and booted on LiveLinux on one of these machines - no not at Best Buy, at another place where the salesdroids were more tolerant. MY GOD IS 12.3 FAST ON A 4-CORE! Well OK, that high end video helped. So why do I use the stuff from the Closet Of Anxieties? 'Cos its there; 'cos I like running Linux on stuff that can't run Windows just to prove a point; 'cos its more of a challenge than running it on high-end modern stuff. And of course so I can write to you telling you how great 12.3 is unmodified, out of the box and how well T'Bird 17.0.5 runs on it. The bottom line is that I'm not very sympathetic to your reasons for sticking with 2.0.0.24. [1] Which is small fry compared to the new car next month -- Given a choice between patching Windows and breeding cats, I'll take breeding cats. The scars heal and you feel like you're doing something productive and the kittens are so cute an sweet. You can't say any of that about patching Windows. And end users aren't as sweet an cuddly as kittens. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org