Şu anda bakım nedeniyle sitemiz kısıtlı işlevsellik sunmaktadır. Mevcut makaleler sorununuzu çözmediyse ve bize soru sormak isterseniz Twitter’da @FirefoxSupport hesabından ve Reddit’teki /r/firefox subreddit'inden destek gönüllülerimize ulaşabilirsiniz.

Avatar for Username

Mozilla Destek’te Ara

Destek dolandırıcılığından kaçının. Mozilla sizden asla bir telefon numarasını aramanızı, mesaj göndermenizi veya kişisel bilgilerinizi paylaşmanızı istemez. Şüpheli durumları “Kötüye kullanım bildir” seçeneğini kullanarak bildirebilirsiniz.

Daha Fazlasını Öğren

Bu başlık arşivlendi. Yardıma ihtiyacınız varsa lütfen yeni bir soru sorun.

Subject column shows [EXTERNAL] but the subject line on the email does not

  • 2 yanıt
  • 1 kişi bu sorunu yaşıyor
  • 10 gösterim
  • Son yanıtı yazan: mfb11

mfb11
mfb11
more options

I have a Macro in MS Outlook that strips the prepended [EXTERNAL] warning from the subject line. In Outlook the warning is gone. I use Exquilla to have Thunderbird access our Exchange server and also use Davmail for the same purpose. Thunderbird shows [EXTERNAL] in the Subject column when viewing these emails as a group in the InBox, but the individual Subject Line does not show [EXTERNAl]. When I view the source for these emails from which [EXTERNAL] has been stripped, I cannot find [EXTERNAL]. It is as if Thunderbird is reading an [EXTERNAL] flag on Exchange, because that [EXTERNAL] text is not really in the email.

When I import the emails from Exchange to a local POP Thunderbird account, these [EXTERNAL] warnings remain. If they are not in the source of the email, they must be some type of retained flag. How do I remove this prepended [EXTERNAL] warning that I now only see in Thunderbird?

I have a Macro in MS Outlook that strips the prepended [EXTERNAL] warning from the subject line. In Outlook the warning is gone. I use Exquilla to have Thunderbird access our Exchange server and also use Davmail for the same purpose. Thunderbird shows [EXTERNAL] in the Subject column when viewing these emails as a group in the InBox, but the individual Subject Line does not show [EXTERNAl]. When I view the source for these emails from which [EXTERNAL] has been stripped, I cannot find [EXTERNAL]. It is as if Thunderbird is reading an [EXTERNAL] flag on Exchange, because that [EXTERNAL] text is not really in the email. When I import the emails from Exchange to a local POP Thunderbird account, these [EXTERNAL] warnings remain. If they are not in the source of the email, they must be some type of retained flag. How do I remove this prepended [EXTERNAL] warning that I now only see in Thunderbird?

Tüm Yanıtlar (2)

Matt
Matt
  • Moderator
  • Top 10 Contributor
more options

try right clicking the folder, selecting properties and then repair. My guess is the list index is just not getting updated when the filter does it's thing.

mfb11
mfb11 Sorunun sahibi
more options

Matt-- It is confusing. Thunderbird still shows [External] in the Subject Column (but not the Subject Line) in Exchange emails in which the Outlook macro stripped the [External] prepend from the subject line. Even after repairing the folder, Thunderbird shows [External] in emails on the Exchange server that Outlook shows no "[External]". The macro runs in Outlook before the email ever makes it to Thunderbird. And the source code for the email shows no [EXTERNAL].

I can't figure out what Thunderbird is seeing (through Exquilla and Davmail).

But you are correct. When I move an email from the Exchange Server to the POP account, it initially shows [EXTERNAL] in the subject column, and not in the individual subject line. Then when I repair the folder, [EXTERNAL] disappears from the subject column.

It seems like the Outlook Macro is not deleting [External] from the Outlook subject line, it is hiding it. The Subject Column sees the hidden "[External]", the subject line does not. Then when you move the message from the Exchange Server to the POP account, the "[External]" really gets deleted, so a repair of the folder gets rid of it from the Subject column as well.

Is there a technical basis for any of this conjecture?