[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference iosg::all-in-1_v30

Title:	OLD ALL-IN-1 (tm) Support Conference
Notice:	Closed - See Note 4331.l to move to IOSG::ALL-IN-1
Moderator:	IOSG::PYE

Created:	Thu Jan 30 1992
Last Modified:	Tue Jan 23 1996
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	4343
Total number of notes:	18308

2466.0. "OA$DDS_PRIME=2, GOLD-L anomolies on blank TO: field" by COMICS::BARHAM (Norbert:) Wed Mar 24 1993 16:34

    ALL-IN-1 3.0-1, OA$DDS_PRIME=2
    
    I've not seen this before but...
    
    If you enter ALL-IN-1 and EM C to create a new mail message, and
    then in a blank field press GOLD-L, the only addressees you see are 
    subscribers, paper mail, hard-copy, I and me, plus any distribution
    lists and some NETWORK.DAT entries.
    You will find you can only get a complete list of users if you first do
    a partial search on any known local or remote user, e.g. BARH<GOLD-L>
    for BARHAM. Once you have successfully returned an address from a
    partial search operation, any future GOLD-L in a blank field will
    produce a different list to that produced immediately after logging in.
    It does not matter which of the TO: or CC: fields you are on - they all
    fail initially until a partial search has worked.
    
    I have been told that the OA$MAIL_ADD_ADDR DSAB is at work here and
    that it should just return subscribers, paper mail, hard-copy, I and
    me. Sounds a bit dubious to me ! But either way there's a problem
    somewhere coz you get different results depending on what happened 
    previously.
    
    Is this a known buglet? I assume it is unlikely to get fixed if I SPR
    it (looking at previous similar but different mail validation articles ?!).
    
    Thanks,
    
    Clive

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
2466.1		COMICS::BARHAM	Norbert:	`Wed Mar 24 1993 16:52`	7
	In fact note 1099 in ALL-IN-1_V23 may hold the answer but I'm no programmer - can anyone translate this into a simple customization for me ?! (assuming it's the same problem). Thanks, Clive
2466.2	haven't seen this one in a while	AIMTEC::WICKS_A	Oscar the Grouch is an Optimist!	`Wed Mar 24 1993 17:17`	11
	Clive, What note 1099 is saying is that the symbol #EMDADDRESS is not being cleared in the pre-function of the form or the field. I thought we had caught all occurrences of this one by the time v2.4 shipped. Is it possible that the customer has a very old cuctomised copy of an EM form - i.e can you reproduce it ALLIN1/NOCUSTOM. regards, Andrew.D.Wicks
2466.3		COMICS::BARHAM	Norbert:	`Thu Mar 25 1993 09:19`	7
	Andy, I reproduced .0 very easily on 3.0-1 with NOCUSTOM. Regards, Clive
2466.4	The S word	AIMTEC::WICKS_A	Oscar the Grouch is an Optimist!	`Thu Mar 25 1993 15:20`	7
	Clive, oh deary me! well you know what the next step is then. regards, andrew.D.Wicks
2466.5	Something similar with Autoforward (EM AF)	ZUR01::WORK19::BURKHALTER		`Wed Jun 30 1993 14:24`	20
	ALL-IN-1 V3.0-1, OA$DDS_PRIME=2 Hi Clive I found something similar to .0 with the autoforward function in ALL-IN-1 (EM AF). If you enter ALL-IN-1 and EM AF to autoforward your mails and then press GOLD-L, the only addressees you see are paper mail, hard-copy and the NETWORK.DAT entries, but no local users. After a partical search operation in EM C as you describe in .0, the produced list in AF after GOLD-L also shows the local users. I think my problem is caused by the same "buglet" as yours. Do you have any news about your buglet? Thanks, Rolf
2466.6	An old chestnut	IOSG::CHINNICK	gone walkabout	`Wed Jun 30 1993 14:55`	4
	It's a known restriction. Might be fixed in a PFR. Who knows? ;-) Paul.
2466.7	Thanks	ZUR01::WORK19::BURKHALTER		`Wed Jun 30 1993 16:19`	6
	Paul Thank you for your quick answer. Let's hope it will be fixed in the next release. Rolf