Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:09:39 -0400 From: Coleman Kane <cokane@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: (OT) X pausing until mouse move (collecting commonalities) Message-ID: <47ECEE13.8080306@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <47EC979A.2030906@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <47EBF0C7.6010901@infracaninophile.co.uk> <47EBF1B0.7000905@FreeBSD.org> <47EC979A.2030906@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Seaman wrote: > Coleman Kane wrote: >> Matthew Seaman wrote: > >>> Bingo. Everything is nice and fast again and I don't have to wiggle >>> the >>> mouse to enter text. Unfortunately Thunderbird seems to have lost >>> contact >>> with Enigmail[*] as a result of these changes and I'm sure there are >>> a few other >>> things that aren't working quite right (but then I'm the old-school >>> type >>> that regards a mouse as a tool used to select which xterm gets the >>> keyboard >>> focus.) > >> Thunderbird seems to not work with enigmail for me since the upgrade >> to TB 2.0.0.12. The engimail people seem intent on blaming everyone >> else for not using "official copies" of ThunderBird, but I cannot >> seem to get it to work even if I follow their special directions for >> building the software from within mail/thunderbird/work after a new >> TB build/install (without running make clean). Their whole argument >> about this being "my fault" for using an "unofficial version" of TB >> smells to me, but I suppose I could always go and fix the problem >> myself. I don't even know what the actual error is that causes this >> to occur. > > Yeah. The interaction between Thunderbird and Enigmail seems a bit > flakey > at best. I've seen it go out, then a few days later when I've got > some time > to investigate, updating ports and recompiling everything (portupgrade > -fR enigmail\*) > to ensure a good baseline --- well, that seems to bring it back. I've > certainly got enigmail working with 2.0.0.12 at the moment on one > machine, > and it was working fine on the other with that combo too. > > Cheers, > > Matthew > amd64 or i386? I've got an amd64 system, and from what I've heard the problem happens more often under amd64. -- Coleman Kane
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47ECEE13.8080306>