From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 24 12:39:55 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7A9A16A494 for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:39:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bh@izb.knu.ac.kr) Received: from izb.knu.ac.kr (izb.knu.ac.kr [155.230.157.93]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AE3213C4A5 for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:39:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bh@izb.knu.ac.kr) Received: by draba.izb.knu.ac.kr (Postfix, from userid 59) id B58383E8B; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 21:39:41 +0900 (KST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on draba.izb.knu.ac.kr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=15.1 tests=NO_RELAYS autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3 Received: from [IPv6:2002:9be6:9d5d:3::3] (viola.izb.knu.ac.kr [IPv6:2002:9be6:9d5d:3::3]) by draba.izb.knu.ac.kr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B7673E7B; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 21:39:41 +0900 (KST) From: Byung-Hee HWANG To: Jay Chandler In-Reply-To: <46F76F25.2080701@sequestered.net> References: <1190618389.1658.7.camel@viola.izb.knu.ac.kr> <46F76F25.2080701@sequestered.net> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: InZealBomb Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 21:39:40 +0900 Message-Id: <1190637580.2907.13.camel@viola.izb.knu.ac.kr> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is your Thunderbird OK? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: bh@izb.knu.ac.kr List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:39:55 -0000 On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 01:02 -0700, Jay Chandler wrote: > Byung-Hee HWANG wrote: > > I _really_ want to share opinions about this topic (Thunderbird's start > > up speed) with you FreeBSD users. > > > > What do you think of? > > > > > I use Thunderbird on my FreeBSD box without issue. FYI, 2.0.0.6 is the > latest, and I have no issue with its load times. For some reason, I could not upgrade to 2.x version. If 6.3-RELEASE or 7.0-RELEASE release in the future, then I'll use 2.x version. Thanks, Byung-Hee