search for: _inside_

I installed xen 3.3.0 on a etch box from sources. I just modified the standard kernel cause of some hardware drivers. I installed xen-tools from backports (3.9-3~bpo40+1). To create a domU ist not the problem. I can connect via ssh and everything works fine. But when i start a domU with "xm create host.example.tld.cfg -c" to login to console from domU it hangs after the message

...stand any of it. As stated, my knowledge of unix is rather limited... On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 15:48, Quentin Garnier wrote: > It's because the logging process is chrooted, doesn't have TZ env. var. > set, and doesn't have a correct /etc/localtime (or whatever your libc > uses) _inside_ the chroot directory. Therefore its timezone is the > default, UTC (formerly known as GMT). As I understand it, it would be a good idea to come up with a more permanent fix. However, I have no idea where to begin. Timo writes about making all logging go through the dovecot-master process ? c...

..._ to LDAP for their "passdb backend" and so never see the information you tried to set up through `smbpasswd`. Some Samba operations use the _Windows_ privileges. They cannot be performed even by a Samba superuser if that user doesn't also have the right Windows privileges. Somewhere _inside_ Samba you need to define what will be the user you use for joining machines to the domain to include sambaSID <domainSID>-500 (S-1-5-21-...-500) and sambaPrimaryGroupSID <domainSID>-512 (S-1-5.21-...512). (These are _Windows_ rules, not something Samba has added or changed.) Also the us...

Hi, I´m need to customize a debian qcow image, but I have this error virt-customize: error: no operating systems were found in the guest image The command that I´m trying is: virt-customize -v -x -a ./kvm_av_4_4_n0.qcow2 --attach ./one_context/packages.iso -root-password password:acens --run ./ctpd/pro/scripts/one_altavault.sh --firstboot-command "dpkg-reconfigure openssh-server I attach

...gt; /dev/sda8 partition - - 83 80G /dev/sda > /dev/sda9 partition - - 83 64M /dev/sda > /dev/sda device - - - 91G - The above does not tell me anything more than the log you already sent. What I would like to know is what is _inside_ each partition, how the various partitions related with each other (e.g. mount points/fstab), etc. -- Pino Toscano

Hi! I am trying to build a package which calls an c function. It compiles it and installs it. But if i run R CMD check test_ the last output are: * checking examples ... ERROR Running examples failed. x<-1:10 and in the test-Ex.out file i find: > test(x) Error in .C("mytest", as.double(x), as.integer(lengthx)) : C/Fortran function name not in load table Execution halte

Hi I've been using dovecot for a long time now, and have nothing but praise for it. It's considerably faster than uw-imap, and has been very easy to configure, in spite of my limited knowledge of unix. One thing still botheres me, though, and that's the time of the entries in my logfiles. It seems that dovecot logs it's entries in GMT, while I'm using GMT+1. This is made

Hello, There seems to be a minor conflict of interesting in R CMD check. It creates a log directory, then gives a WARNING about it being there: * using log directory /home/darstr/Repitools_github/pkg/Repitools.Rcheck * using R version 2.13.0 RC (2011-04-05 r55310) * using platform: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (64-bit) * using session charset: UTF-8 ... ... * checking

...goal, it is entirely possible that we may have missed something; we would appreciate references to relevant code or writeups that people on this list may be aware of. As an example, one issue that makes this non-trivial is that llvm (as far as we know) is free to manufacture pointers to locations _inside_ objects, something referred to as a "derived pointer" in some places. Since these pointers need to be updated in sync with the objects they point into, a relocating GC needs to be aware of them; and the runtime needs to be able to read off which registers and stack slots hold such pointer...

...building an LLVM cross-compiler from Linux/x86 to Linux/ARM (as has another llvm-dev poster). Someone mentioned to me off-list that he managed to get it to build, but I haven't been able to reproduce the build using his instructions (I'll post my results in another thread). Building LLVM _inside_ Qemu is rather slow and painful -- I've tried it once and didn't get far with it. However, since LLVM + LLVM-GCC are shipped as part of the iPhone SDK, at least Darwin/x86 -> Darwin/ARM cross is possible. Misha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed......

...- 83 80G /dev/sda > /dev/sda9 partition - - 83 64M /dev/sda > /dev/sda device - - - 91G - The above does not tell me anything more than the log you already sent. What I would like to know is what is _inside_ each partition, how the various partitions related with each other (e.g. mount points/fstab), etc. -- Pino Toscano ________________________________ Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada...

Hi... I have had a problem when I am going to detach one specific LVM partitions of Xen, so I have been trying xm destroy <domain>, lvchange -an <lvm_partition>, lvremove -f.... So I haven''t had sucess. I restarted the server with init 1 yet and nothing... I have seem two specific process started xenwatch and xenbus, but I am not sure if this processes have some action over

Now that I have HLVM up and running on x86 and x64 I am interested in testing it out on an ARM in preparation for their imminent world domination. I believe LLVM already has excellent support for the ARM thanks to Apple's ARM-based products. However, I'd really like an ARM-based consumer device suitable for developing and testing HLVM on, rather than using a cross compiler and

...sation, so I don't know whether I agree with > his reasoning or not. But we are supposed to be moving away from GFP_NOIO > towards marking regions with memalloc_noio_save() / restore. If you do > that, you won't need vmalloc(GFP_NOIO). It was basically to detect GFP_NOIO context _inside_ vmalloc and use the scope API to enforce it there. Does it solve potential problems? Yes it does. Does it solve any existing report, no I am not aware of any. Is it a good fix longterm? Absolutely no, because the scope API should be used _at the place_ where the scope starts rather than a random ut...

I'm in the process of porting a set of routines from S to R (the 'asypow' package) and have struck one or two problems that I've been unable to clear up with the documentation I have. I may simply need a pointer to the right docs. I managed to get the code to run with minimal changes, but in order to get it to load using library(), had to run it through: R CMD build ... and

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 05:21:26PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 04:54:53PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > No way. This is just wrong! First of all, you will explode most likely > > > > on many allocations of small sizes. Second,

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 05:21:26PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 04:54:53PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > No way. This is just wrong! First of all, you will explode most likely > > > > on many allocations of small sizes. Second,

On Friday 20 February 2004 12:10, Ricardo Galli wrote: > > wants to send such a patch, we're happy to integrate them. I don't > > remember the DoS bug - that might be a real problem. It could be that a > > It started out with this: > > http://www.xiph.org/archives/icecast-dev/0366.html > > and I found the problem and sent the patch: > >

...ow whether I agree with > > his reasoning or not. But we are supposed to be moving away from GFP_NOIO > > towards marking regions with memalloc_noio_save() / restore. If you do > > that, you won't need vmalloc(GFP_NOIO). > > It was basically to detect GFP_NOIO context _inside_ vmalloc and use the > scope API to enforce it there. Does it solve potential problems? Yes it > does. Does it solve any existing report, no I am not aware of any. Is > it a good fix longterm? Absolutely no, because the scope API should be > used _at the place_ where the scope starts rat...

...ow whether I agree with > > his reasoning or not. But we are supposed to be moving away from GFP_NOIO > > towards marking regions with memalloc_noio_save() / restore. If you do > > that, you won't need vmalloc(GFP_NOIO). > > It was basically to detect GFP_NOIO context _inside_ vmalloc and use the > scope API to enforce it there. Does it solve potential problems? Yes it > does. Does it solve any existing report, no I am not aware of any. Is > it a good fix longterm? Absolutely no, because the scope API should be > used _at the place_ where the scope starts rat...