Re: [Evolution] Trash folder oddities/andre

On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 08:16 -0700, Brewster Gillett wrote: 

On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 19:04 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote:
Brewster Gillett wrote:
Doesn't work. Couple of things; (1) I haven't been getting any messages
citing "error storage" or "summary and folder mismatch"

Have you identified which disk folder corresponds to the trash folder?

... I have a hunch that part of the problem may be that my older version
(2.28.3, which I also identified in my original query) does not have
some of the more detailed error messaging found in later versions.

Some old versions had problems with very large local mailboxes. 

I know, the conventional wisdom says I should be upgrading more
frequently. But I read these lists in order to gain a sense of what
later versions are like, and I see a lot of complaints and problems with
each new release - it tends to make me prefer to stick with the devil I
know rather than introduce a whole new set of problems :-)

Of course forums and mailing lists have a powerful negative bias;
people typically only post when something appears broken,  everyone for
whom it works well remains silent.  This is the very sad truth about the
Internet as a whole.

I would unequivocally advise you to upgrade.  The current versions are
much improved over the Evolution of a couple of years ago.  No doubt,
hands down.

Most of the issues I see on this list are very much self-inflicted
[using bizarre|insane|whacka-mole|incompetent backup/restore methods
seems to be a common issue].

If I have to upgrade in  order to move past some of these issues, I
suppose I will - what, in your view, is the most stable and least
buggy latest version of Evo that I should try?

Try before you buy.  Backup your data [File -> Backup...], take it to a
machine [or virtual machine] with a current version, restore your data
[File -> Restore...].  See what happens.  That is certainly what I do -
I need stuff to work.  I do that even though my luck has been very good.
If your information is important you should treat it that way.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]