There is a work-around for this.

Move all the messages in your Unix folder to an empty normal folder - that will only move messages that have not been "deleted"
Delete the Unix folder and create a new one with the same name as previously.
Move the messages back from the normal folder to the (new) Unix folder.

Bob

hi

what printer are you using? this happened for us as well, when i upgraded from 4.31 to 4.41.  it has nothing to do with novell or windows server 2003. 4.31 was printing correctly, 4.41 was not - but only with brother hl 1450 printers. hp 1320 were working fine and printing from the chosen tray! we have defined a 2nd printer with the correct setting ie print from 2nd tray only as default - no success.

mario
 

I think my post was a little bit too short: I do not use the brackets in the mail address, it is part of the name (alias) in the address book. So, if my entry is "name (Hotmail)" and "mail@hotmail.com" in the address book and I send him a mail, I get "To: Hotmail" in the From column of the sent folder. But if I open the sent mail I see a correct To line in the header "To: name (Hotmail)". All I need is to have the same display in the folder view.

One more funny thing is happening if I send mail to multiple addresses and the last one has the brackets. Again I just see what is inside the brackets, any other mail address is not displayed!

Other mail programs create a formatting like: "name (Hotmail)" <mail@hotmail.com> Maybe the quotation marks help here.

(BTW, it would be nice to see the real mail address beside the name from the address book in the sent mails To line.)

Greetings,

Stephan

Please send me a complete message including all headers etc in a zip file. The symptom you report normally only occurs when the html renderer Bearhtml cannot display the formatted message, so it falls back and tries to show you the source html.  The alternative reason is that the message headers are incorrect or not conforming to specifications.

 Please mail your sample zip file to irelam@telus.net 

Martin 

This update doesn't seem to work for me. I did as described above, replacing the files (but wisely renaming the old ones) and then fired up PM, and Lo!  a crash window pops up, and PM won't start.

Put back the old files and everything's hunkydory again.

Shah

FOLLOW UP

I found it it was a corrupt words4.db3 file. Once I fixed that, the update worked fine.
 

Just a quick caveat on all the excellent replies you've already received:

 When you share files from one computer to another, you'll be tempted to just share the entire drive (or volume, or partition, if you prefer those terms).  DON'T DO IT.

 Just share the pegasus email folder or folders.  If you share the whole drive, you increase your vulnerability to viruses and worms that use Microsoft Networking to spread.  There's no need to share the whole drive, you just need the folders that hold your messages and configuration files.
 

Thanks for the tip Martin.
It seems to work, no downloads in this particular mail.

Regards,

Maikel 

it was user access rights.  Everyone needs write access to each mail folder in order to post mail.

I don't know how this works exactly, but apparently every time I edited one of the sigs (often using cut-and-paste of existing text for consistency) it seemed to wind up in the "internet, formatted" variant, even though I selected the "internet, plain" variant. Finally, I noticed that when I changed one of the sigs from "i..,f.." to "i..,p.." mode the text disappeared. So, I tried pasting the text into both variants, and voila, I now have my sigs back.

This whole thing behaves very odd, however. I'm not sure I understand all that had happened. I think I might have set a parameter elsewhere which sends all my email as an "internet, plain" message. Why the sig doesn't automatically move to that complete with text is beyond me. Sure was hard to figure out, though.

Rod

dilberts_left_nut,

Just wanted to pass on to you that my PassWord has been changed and is even more difficult to break-down than before.  I do appreciate your concern and warning me of this possible disaster.  I managed a small computer system on a military base with about 41 dumb terminals that was running BTOS, if you know what that is, and slowly progressed to IBM compatible desktops running Windows 3.1 to start with.  All I know about these systems has come from the School-of-HARD-Knocks and I have the lumps to prove it.

 I am very Security Conscious and claim to have Double-Noids also known as Paranoid.

Again I do thank one and all that have posted here and read my Roasted Posties, 

Thanks, David, for the reply, but the issue here is that PMail cuts out text regardless of the reformat/wrap settings. The first line after a long 998-character line gets cut at an apparently arbitrary position, and while the text is all there in raw mode, it will not appear at all in "normal" view mode, however I try to change settings (wrapping, font, printer driver).

To clarify my point, I reproduced the problem by sending myself an E-Mail with three lines: One of scrambled characters, 998 long, and another one consisting of "SECOND LINE", repeated many times. The third and last line just says "How does it appear".

Look:



And here's the raw view:



As you can see, the second line gets cut in normal view!

lazy

It should be an easy change in v5 to allow it to hold a user-specifiable number of addresses. The current restriction exists to ensure compatibility with the DOS (!!) version of Pegasus Mail, but I think we have well and truly moved beyond that now. I've made a note of this.

Cheers!

-- David --

I just test TinySpell1.7 it works fine!

http://www.tinyspell.m6.net/

[quote user="drtlc"]The only thing I can figure is that the PMI files didn't come over and when it went to process the folder, it deleted everything since the crash.[/quote]

Did you try re-indexing the folder? 

I don't know of a way to make public folders accessible via IMAP.  You would need to get them copied to the actual mailbox directory(ies) as individual messages or combined into a folder file.

Messages in public folders are stored as individual .CNR files.  They are the same as Pegasus Mail new message files (.CNM).  You can change the .CNR to .CNM and place the renamed file into a mailbox directory to have it appear as a new message.

If you want them in their own folder you would need to use Pegasus Mail to copy them from a public folder into a Pegasus Mail folder and then transfer the folder files to a Mercury mailbox directory.

OK, that shows that it's probably not a fundamental mis-configuration problem.

What do the logs show? 

This problem must happen fairly frequently.  This thread is almost exactly like the one I started when I had the same problem!

Hi Thomas,

 
Thanks for the reply.

 
RE: if the option is unchecked, the attachment and the message text are

sent in a single message; it is checked, the attachment and the message

text are sent in two different messages. (Older versions had the

meaning the other way around.)

 
I checked and that wasn't checked. When I send a test email to myself, I just get the attachment and no text message if I use rich text and MIME. I don't get one email with the attachment and another with the message.

 
Currently, I have the following checked:

In the section re: When sending messages containing rich text, I have the top option checked:

__ <!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shapetype id="_x0000_t75" </p><p> coordsize="21600,21600" o:spt="75" o:preferrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" </p><p> filled="f" stroked="f"> </p><p> <v:stroke joinstyle="miter"/> </p><p> <v:formulas> </p><p> <v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"/> </p><p> <v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"/> </p><p> </v:formulas> </p><p> <v:path o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"/> </p><p> <o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"/> </p><p></v:shapetype><v:shape id="_x0000_i1025" type="#_x0000_t75" style='width:468pt; </p><p> height:351pt'> </p><p> <v:imagedata src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\DAVIDL~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\02\clip_image001.png" </p><p> o:title=""/> </p><p></v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]-->Generate multipart/alternate versions of richtext

In the Advanced Settings, I have the bottom two checked

The Blind BCC option (I know that's not relevant here)

 
and

 
Enable TextFile Autodetection.

I don't have the MIME encoding checked because that's what created the raw message info to show which was my earlier problem and posting. But when I checked it, that's when this problem emerged.... I can do Rich text with no raw formatting shwoing... but then I can't get my message sent along with an attachment. 

I tried to copy and paste screen shot, but it wouldn't go through.  Again... this is the first time this has happened in the 7 or 8 years I've used Pegasus...

Any other suggestions?

Thanks for your efforts,

DAvid

oh no, the downloads on my website are only some games, my son has coded :-)

but if there is interest in the utility i could make it downloadable as freeware. it "only" needs some work before: a small manual and a translation into english.

[quote user="Goody"]So far, I have found only one client that does all this and much more.  The only thing is HTML seems to get it problems.  HTML must be a difficult thing to process in email clients.[/quote]

It's difficult in and of itself. One of the problems is that HTML parsers, unlike XML parsers, are designed to be "forgiving". XML parsers are supposed to stop parsing when encountering syntax errors:

[quote]Second, XML has draconian error-handling rules. In contrast to the leniency of HTML parsers, XML parsers are required to fail catastrophically if they encounter even the simplest syntax error in an XML document.[/quote]

http://webkit.org/blog/68/understanding-html-xml-and-xhtml/

I guess the web would not have grown as phenomenally fast as it has if the people who coded web browsers hadn't tried to be lenient in their parsing, working around errors and trying to second-guess what someone had "meant" when he made an error in his page. It's meant anyone and everyone can put up something written by hand in a slapdash suck-it-and see way in Notepad or in poor WYSIWYG tools that write dodgy HTML. And there's a kind of vicious circle here.

But the result is that HTML parsing is a bit of a mess. How should a browser handle some error that someone should not have made in the first place? It's anyone's guess, and the error-handling of every browser is different. Should you give someone what he's (literally) asked for when that makes no sense, or guess that he's got a conceptual misunderstanding here that's not uncommon, and that Internet Explorer has made allowances for, so that you'd better do the same? It makes browsers even more complex than they need to be and even larger. Have you seen the size of Firefox these days? And don't even ask about Internet Explorer.

There's also the matter of proprietary extensions to the HTML standards--though that's perhaps less of a problem than it was. However, it's certainly a problem in email. If you check the box to use Word as the editor in Outlook you end up sending very bad HTML full of gibberish that is not part of any official HTML standard known to the W3C. 

[quote]The Bat does a terriable job with HTML[/quote]

I didn't know that. But you can't blame it. It's not easy to do. Outlook Express uses Internet Explorer to do HTML parsing, and that's a full-blown browser, so naturally that's going to do a more polished job. However, the down side is that that's probably not a very safe thing to do--all that complexity and functionality brings security problems with it. (However, OE does, these days, at least use the "restricted" Internet Zone in IE by default; it used to run scripts and all sorts of nonsense, which is why malware used to go through it like a dose of salts.)

In Office 2007, Microsoft has, apparently, switched to using Office's HTML viewer (the one used for Word) instead of IE for Outlook. I don't know why they made the change, but it will make Outlook less capable at displaying HTML.