On Monday October 12 2020 11:21:43 Stakanov wrote: >So we do agree that KMAIL 3 was at the time a lightweight, fast and functional >MTA. I've never used it, but still have this idea of testing a Trinity DE one day. > Just to be clear, I am using MySQL (mariadb) backend. KMail2 works just fine > with that. FWIW, me too, but with KMail 4.14.x . It does get wonky from time to time, but I'm pretty certain that is not because of the DB backend choice. R
Re: Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- From: René J.V. Bertin <rjvbertin@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:54:05 +0200
- In-reply-to: <41103311.nyZT0esemi@roadrunner>
- References: <136308e9-301b-99ae-f775-e24d272e9d87@peerfreedom.org> <3871651.EypeT7VSMe@bola> <41103311.nyZT0esemi@roadrunner>
- User-agent: KMail/4.13.3 (Linux/4.14.23-ck1-mainline-core2-rjvb; KDE/4.14.38; x86_64; ; )
- References:
- Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- From: dragon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- From: René J.V. Bertin
- Re: Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- From: Stakanov
- Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- Prev by Date: Re: Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- Next by Date: Re: Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- Previous by thread: Re: Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- Next by thread: Re: Years later, kmail still is not a viable email client?
- Index(es):
 |