search for: _multiple_

Hello for all, Anyone using any software for management your projects? Thank''s -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Hi, we are using a _single_ LDAP server as backend for _multiple_ Samba standalone file servers (security=user). This LDAP server serves mainly other purposes and access for Samba is read only so the situation is not optimal but "it works for us". Still I don't understand one phenomenon concerning visibility of LDAP groups. The LDAP configurati...

Am 11.02.19 um 13:22 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:30:51 +0100 > Matthias Leopold via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> we are using a _single_ LDAP server as backend for _multiple_ Samba >> standalone file servers (security=user). This LDAP server serves >> mainly other purposes and access for Samba is read only so the >> situation is not optimal but "it works for us". Still I don't >> understand one phenomenon concerning visibility of LD...

...m 11.02.19 um 13:22 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: >>> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:30:51 +0100 >>> Matthias Leopold via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> we are using a _single_ LDAP server as backend for _multiple_ Samba >>>> standalone file servers (security=user). This LDAP server serves >>>> mainly other purposes and access for Samba is read only so the >>>> situation is not optimal but "it works for us". Still I don't >>>> understand one phenom...

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:30:51 +0100 Matthias Leopold via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hi, > > we are using a _single_ LDAP server as backend for _multiple_ Samba > standalone file servers (security=user). This LDAP server serves > mainly other purposes and access for Samba is read only so the > situation is not optimal but "it works for us". Still I don't > understand one phenomenon concerning visibility of LDAP groups. >...

...rowser for TESTLAB. So, is this all possible? I really don't want to have to have a long-running Windows box on the TESTLAB network just to get browsing working, since I don't have a machine available... BTW, I've read BROWSING.txt and BROWSING-Config.txt, but they don't apply to _multiple_ domains/workgroups on multiple subnets. Thanks in advance, Kenn

...mba: >>>>> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:30:51 +0100 >>>>> Matthias Leopold via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> we are using a _single_ LDAP server as backend for _multiple_ >>>>>> Samba standalone file servers (security=user). This LDAP server >>>>>> serves mainly other purposes and access for Samba is read only >>>>>> so the situation is not optimal but "it works for us". Still I >>>>>>...

...gt; > > Am 11.02.19 um 13:22 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:30:51 +0100 > > Matthias Leopold via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> we are using a _single_ LDAP server as backend for _multiple_ Samba > >> standalone file servers (security=user). This LDAP server serves > >> mainly other purposes and access for Samba is read only so the > >> situation is not optimal but "it works for us". Still I don't > >> understand one phenomenon concern...

Hello, Could you please explain or send an example for decoding a packet that contains multiple Speex frames. According to the API document the speex_decode_int() decodes only one frame of speech. Best regards, Danny Peled R&D Software Engineer Intelligence Solutions NICE Systems Ltd. ISRAEL *+ (972) 9 769 7161 ? + (972) 54 4 602840 *Danny.Peled at nice.com <mailto:*Danny.Peled at

...wland Penny via samba: > >>> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:30:51 +0100 > >>> Matthias Leopold via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> we are using a _single_ LDAP server as backend for _multiple_ > >>>> Samba standalone file servers (security=user). This LDAP server > >>>> serves mainly other purposes and access for Samba is read only > >>>> so the situation is not optimal but "it works for us". Still I > >>>> don't u...

Folks- I have had a machine dropped in my lap that I am trying to get CentOS 4.1 to run on as a first pass (the hope is for it to eventually run Rocks -- http://www.rocksclusters.org , which uses CentOS 4.x as its underlying OS). The machine has 2 Opteron 250DP (2.4GHz) with 4 GB of RAM. It is using a Tyan Thunder K8WE (S2895A2NRF) motherboard with an nVidia nForce chipset --

From: Bruno Delbono <bruno.s.delbono at mail.ac> > I'm really sorry to start this thread again but I found something very > interesting I thought everyone should ^at least^ have a look at: > http://uadmin.blogspot.com/2005/06/4-dual-xeon-vs-e4500.html > This article takes into account a comparision of 4 dual xeon vs. e4500. > The author (not me!) talks about "A

Hi all, Somebody has tested directory server (http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Main_Page) under CentOS 4.1?? Is it ready for production environments?? Somebody has ported to centos?? Thank you very much. __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! Reg?strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/

...text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org> wrote: > It seems so based on the page I sent you. Although I think you > might have to change your string slightly. > > The docs explicitly stated that 1 server _can_ authenticate against > _multiple_ realms. I don't see how your setup is different, except > for using the MS-Kerberos protocol which has been integrated into > newer Kerberos client implementations. Oh, well. Than the only way to check it out is for me is to attempt to implement it and see how it goes. I was just hopi...

Hi, I have searched the archives on the topic, and it seems that the list gurus favor load balancing to be done in the kernel as opposed to other means. I have been using a home-grown approach, which splits traffic based on `-m statistic --mode random --probability X`, then CONNMARKs the individual connections and the kernel happily routes them. I understand that for > 2 links it will become