On Mon, 2003-08-25 at 07:07, Erich Enke wrote: > I've got a fresh Evolution 1.4.3 on a fresh Redhat Beta machine (fresh as > in "hasn't been used before this week"). I have an IMAP account that I > can > see from the web (which has the correct times) which I also viewed under > Evolution for the purpose of testing this. I am unable to make the > arrival > times for the messages be what they should be (arrival times in Evolution > were always 4 hours earlier of what they should be). > > Testing this around midnight produced an actual message arrival time of > Aug 25, 12:53 am (web), but even though Evolution as a whole (on the > summary page) > recognizes that it is Aug 25, it says it received the message Today at > 8:53 pm. > > I do have both the timezone on Evolution and on my webmailer set > correctly > (Denver time). I can't reproduce your bug though (maybe mine is getting > in the way). Perhaps. I have my time and date setup to be America/New York (currently EDT which is GMT -0400). I, and all the users reporting the problem to me, are running Evo 1.4.4. Joe > > Erich Patrick T Enke > > On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:22:01 +0000, "Joe Marcus Clarke" > <marcus FreeBSD org> said: > > A bunch of FreeBSD users have reported that the date/time in the mail > > summary view sometimes shows up incorrectly. That is, instead of > > showing up with a localtime offset, it shows up with a UTC/GMT offset. > > I had never been able to reproduce this. My mail summary view always > > had the right date/time. > > > > However, tonight, a new Evo user reported that this only happens if you > > start in Mail, then switch to, say, the Executive Summary, then back to > > Mail. Sure enough, I switch from Mail to Summary then back, and now all > > my date/times showed up offset from GMT. That is, one message went from > > 6:33 PM to 10:33 PM (I live in EDT). This is 100% reproduceable thus > > far. > > > > My question is, are there any Linux users seeing this? Is this a known > > issue? I didn't see anything in the Bugzilla database. If this isn't > > reproduceable on Linux, do you know where I could go about fixing this > > in the code, or looking for more clues as to what is going on? Thanks. > > > > Joe > > > > -- > > Joe Marcus Clarke > > FreeBSD GNOME Team :: gnome FreeBSD org > > FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome > > http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome -- Joe Marcus Clarke FreeBSD GNOME Team :: gnome FreeBSD org FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part