search for: 16444

...3 08:47:29 mailserver sendmail[16504]: jBD6lTpP016504: from=<stopped@imcf.co.za>, size=1135, class=0, nrcpts=1, msgid=<IMCFSPOOL1gXLsxpTlj0000036b@IMCFSPOOL1.imcf.co.za>, proto=ESMTP, daemon=MTA, relay=www.dubaisa.co.za [196.31.48.202] (may be forged) Dec 13 08:47:53 mailserver sendmail[16444]: jBD6gNEl016443: to=<brenda@dubaisa.co.za>, ctladdr=<melaniek@dubaisa.co.za> (514/100), delay=00:05:30, xdelay=00:00:30, mailer=local, pri=191814, dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent Dec 13 08:48:16 mailserver sendmail[16515]: jBD6mG1P016515: from=<russells@dubaisa.co.za>, size=2112751, class=0...

Hi Bill, You can find the same issue in the buildbot: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64-elf-linux2/builds/16444/steps/compile.llvm.stage2/logs/stdio It is failing for me both in BE (gcc 4.8.2) and LE(4.9.1). I am compiling with clang 3.5, but those are the gcc toolchains I am using. What do you think is the best way to fix this? Thanks! Samuel Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote on...

...; Subject: Re: Issue with std::call_once in PPC64 platform > > On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 11:59 -0500, Samuel F Antao wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > > > You can find the same issue in the buildbot: > > > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64-elf-linux2/builds/ > 16444/steps/compile.llvm.stage2/logs/stdio > > > > It is failing for me both in BE (gcc 4.8.2) and LE(4.9.1). I am > > compiling with clang 3.5, but those are the gcc toolchains I am using. > > > > What do you think is the best way to fix this? > > I don't know wha...

...;>> >>> On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 11:59 -0500, Samuel F Antao wrote: >>>> Hi Bill, >>>> >>>> You can find the same issue in the buildbot: >>>> >>>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64-elf-linux2/builds/ >>> 16444/steps/compile.llvm.stage2/logs/stdio >>>> >>>> It is failing for me both in BE (gcc 4.8.2) and LE(4.9.1). I am >>>> compiling with clang 3.5, but those are the gcc toolchains I am >> using. >>>> >>>> What do you think is the best w...

Hello About every three months, my dad's little Asterisk server that handles his business phone line with an OpenVox PCI card stops taking calls. To check if it's the cause, I'd like to run a CRON job every night to restart Zaptel and Asterisk. Before I go ahead, I'd like to know if I can just send the following commands, or if there are issues I should know about:

...-0500, Samuel F Antao wrote: >> >>>> Hi Bill, >> >>>> >> >>>> You can find the same issue in the buildbot: >> >>>> >> >>>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64-elf-linux2/builds/ >> >>> 16444/steps/compile.llvm.stage2/logs/stdio >> >>>> >> >>>> It is failing for me both in BE (gcc 4.8.2) and LE(4.9.1). I am >> >>>> compiling with clang 3.5, but those are the gcc toolchains I am >> >> using. >> >>>> >&...

...ntact: "Alan Ferrency" <sip:sip_alan@10.11.220.128:5060> Server: Sipura/SPA941-4.1.8 Content-Length: 210 Allow: ACK, BYE, CANCEL, INFO, INVITE, NOTIFY, OPTIONS, REFER Content-Type: application/sdp v=0 o=- 6691772 6691772 IN IP4 10.11.220.128 s=- c=IN IP4 10.11.220.128 t=0 0 m=audio 16444 RTP/AVP 0 101 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:101 0-15 a=ptime:20 a=sendrecv --- (11 headers 11 lines)--- Found RTP audio format 0 Found RTP audio format 101 Peer audio RTP is at port 10.11.220.128:16444 Found description format PCMU Found description format telephone...

Using 2.2.1a and a 2.4 kernel patched for win4lin. Everything is working but: I mount all the available network shares on my linux box as root to one network directory. If a windows client shuts down while the linux box is still connected, the share is not removed from my mount list or from /proc/mounts It cannot be removed with umount. I can kill the smbmount with kill -15 but the share is still

...el Communications <sip:699@192.168.1.201:5062> Server: Linksys/PAP2-3.1.9(LSc) Content-Length: 233 Allow: ACK, BYE, CANCEL, INFO, INVITE, NOTIFY, OPTIONS, REFER Supported: x-sipura Content-Type: application/sdp v=0 o=- 13282 13282 IN IP4 192.168.1.201 s=- c=IN IP4 192.168.1.201 t=0 0 m=audio 16444 RTP/AVP 0 100 101 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=rtpmap:100 NSE/8000 a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:101 0-15 a=ptime:30 a=sendrecv --- (12 headers 12 lines)--- Found RTP audio format 0 Found RTP audio format 100 Found RTP audio format 101 Peer audio RTP is at port 192.168.1.201:16444 Found descr...

...6129, 16135, 16140, 16146, 16156, 16162, 16168, 16177, 16185, 16191, 16195, 16203, 16210, 16217, 16225, 16234, 16237, 16246, 16253, 16262, 16269, 16278, 16283, 16288, 16297, 16304, 16311, 16319, 16326, 16332, 16337, 16346, 16353, 16360, 16366, 16370, 16381, 16384, 16395, 16399, 16407, 16415, 16422, 16444, 16452, 16454, 16467, 16474, 16477, 16484, 16490, 16501, 16508, 16514, 16520, 16529, 16533, 16539, 16550, 16556, 16564, 16566, 16578, 16582, 16593, 16599, 16604, 16613, 16620, 16623, 16635, 16636, 16654, 16660, 16666, 16673, 16681, 16688, 16693, 16702, 16706, 16714, 16721, 16728, 16734, 16745, 1674...

Hi all, I observe that r220932 (Removing the static initializer in ManagedStatic.cpp by using llvm_call_once to initialize the ManagedStatic mutex.) is causing tablegen to segfault in PPC platforms during static initialization. The crash happens while calling std::call_once introduced by this patch in the wrapper used in getManagedStaticMutex. I understand this call is buggy for some platforms

...0.2) Dec 11 12:22:49 moby rsyncd[16424]: auth failed on module tmp from core (192.168.100.2) Dec 11 12:24:34 moby rsyncd[16431]: auth failed on module tmp from core (192.168.100.2) Dec 11 12:25:03 moby rsyncd[16439]: auth failed on module tmp from core (192.168.100.2) Dec 11 12:26:47 moby rsyncd[16444]: auth failed on module tmp from core (192.168.100.2) [root@moby /]# [root@core /]# bugger bash: bugger: command not found [root@core /]# Can anyone spot the obvious mistake and put me out of my misery?? tia nick@nexnix

..., 16156, > 16162, 16168, 16177, 16185, 16191, 16195, 16203, 16210, 16217, > 16225, 16234, 16237, 16246, 16253, 16262, 16269, 16278, 16283, > 16288, 16297, 16304, 16311, 16319, 16326, 16332, 16337, 16346, > 16353, 16360, 16366, 16370, 16381, 16384, 16395, 16399, 16407, > 16415, 16422, 16444, 16452, 16454, 16467, 16474, 16477, 16484, > 16490, 16501, 16508, 16514, 16520, 16529, 16533, 16539, 16550, > 16556, 16564, 16566, 16578, 16582, 16593, 16599, 16604, 16613, > 16620, 16623, 16635, 16636, 16654, 16660, 16666, 16673, 16681, > 16688, 16693, 16702, 16706, 16714, 16721, 16728...

...16146, 16156, 16162, 16168, 16177, 16185, > 16191, 16195, 16203, 16210, 16217, 16225, 16234, 16237, 16246, 16253, > 16262, 16269, 16278, 16283, 16288, 16297, 16304, 16311, 16319, 16326, > 16332, 16337, 16346, 16353, 16360, 16366, 16370, 16381, 16384, 16395, > 16399, 16407, 16415, 16422, 16444, 16452, 16454, 16467, 16474, 16477, > 16484, 16490, 16501, 16508, 16514, 16520, 16529, 16533, 16539, 16550, > 16556, 16564, 16566, 16578, 16582, 16593, 16599, 16604, 16613, 16620, > 16623, 16635, 16636, 16654, 16660, 16666, 16673, 16681, 16688, 16693, > 16702, 16706, 16714, 16721, 16728...

..., 16156, > 16162, 16168, 16177, 16185, 16191, 16195, 16203, 16210, 16217, > 16225, 16234, 16237, 16246, 16253, 16262, 16269, 16278, 16283, > 16288, 16297, 16304, 16311, 16319, 16326, 16332, 16337, 16346, > 16353, 16360, 16366, 16370, 16381, 16384, 16395, 16399, 16407, > 16415, 16422, 16444, 16452, 16454, 16467, 16474, 16477, 16484, > 16490, 16501, 16508, 16514, 16520, 16529, 16533, 16539, 16550, > 16556, 16564, 16566, 16578, 16582, 16593, 16599, 16604, 16613, > 16620, 16623, 16635, 16636, 16654, 16660, 16666, 16673, 16681, > 16688, 16693, 16702, 16706, 16714, 16721, 16728...

I don't think it will be easy to identify the problem remotely. You can try logging in with password (if not disabled), or sshing with some other key, or logging into some other user. If you are able to get access to the machine, post the server's error log here. On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Jin Li <lijin.abc at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Tanmay, > > The server is not

I have a zone "rw" defined as tun0 in interfaces. From that zone, pings to zone "loc" succeed but pings to remote networks (On IPsec VPNs) are rejected in the all2all chain. From my point of view, these pings should be in the rw2cctc chain. (rw to cctc is ACCEPTed in policy.) I must have a hole in my config, where would it be? Thanks, A.