search for: batlle

Hi I have an hp1220c printer I'm having problems with also. Which patches are you referring to and where can I get them? Dennis > >Message: 1 >Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 12:43:17 +0200 >From: "Llu'is Batlle" <lluisbatlle@tavil.net> >To: samba@lists.samba.org >Subject: Re: [Samba] samba-2.2.5-printing.patch > >On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 12:28:22PM +0200, Thomas Bork wrote: > >>Hi @all, >> >>I cannot use this patch in 2.2.5. >>I patched the source before wi...

...ptions.c. It seems to me that it is a protocol related impediment, since --dry-run is always checked before any action in the generator/receiver side. Can anyone point me to a solution? If not, I'd like to propose "batched dry-run" mode as a new feature. :) Regards Leandro Batlle Fresenius Medical Care Argentina Suipacha 1067 Piso 7 (1008) Buenos Aires, Argentina Tel.: +54-11-4130-1135 Fax: +54-11-4130-1111 e-mail: Leandro.Batlle@fmc-ag.com http://www.fmc-ag.com.ar

Hello, I had a raid1 btrfs (540GB) on vanilla 3.6.3, a disk failed, and removed it at power off, plugged in a new one, partitioned it (to 110GB, by error), and added it to btrfs. I tried to remove the missing device, and it said "Input/output error" after a while. Next attempts simply gave "Invalid argument". I repartitioned, rebooted the system, and made the partition grow:

Hello, some time ago we discussed on #btrfs that the nocow attribute for files wasn''t working (around 3.3 or 3.4 kernels). That was evident by files fragmenting even with the attribute set. Chris mentioned to find a fix quickly for that, and posted some lines of change into irc. But recently someone mentioned that 3.6-rc looks like still not respecting nocow for files. Is there really

Hi there. I've been some days dealing with printing problems in Win2k clients, having a Samba 2.2.5 parched with "parse_sec.patch" as a printer server. When I try to print anything, explorer.exe dies. Sometimes dies spoolsv.exe, or sometimes all the system locks (it may be because explorer do not restart). It happens to all my Win2k clients with Service Pack 2, and only when using

Hi! (I sent other mails some time ago, about not-using the Julian''s patches). When I try the configuration from Nano.txt, having the Julian''s patches applied, only the first ''hop'' of the routing table "222" is used (according to tables shown in Nano.txt). I saw that this question was asked some time ago, with no answer. Maybe someone can tell me the

Hello everybody, I'm having trouble with samba 3.5.11 and an access 97 database. I work in a business with 5 users that use a mdb database over samba, and for the first to make a query everything works fine, but if some other user tries to make a query when the first one is doing it, the database works really slow, like if the .mdb file is being blocked (that's what I suppose). I've

Hello everybody, I'm having trouble with samba 3.5.11 and an access 97 database. I work in a business with 5 users that use a mdb database over samba, and for the first to make a query everything works fine, but if some other user tries to make a query when the first one is doing it, the database works really slow, like if the .mdb file is being blocked (that's what I suppose). I've

Hi! I get this strange behaviour... I don''t know how some packets get into wrong rules. My rules are those: 0: from all lookup local 50: from all lookup main 201: from 192.168.17.0/28 lookup 201 202: from 192.168.16.0/28 lookup 202 222: from all lookup 222 32766: from all lookup main 32767: from all lookup default Table main has: 192.168.17.0/28 dev eth2

As I''ve read in http://gnumonks.org/papers/netfilter-lk2000/presentation.html, there''s said about the "nat" netfilter table: "This table is different from the ''filter'' table, in that only the first packet of a new connection will traverse the table. The result of this traversal is then applied to all future packets of the same connection." I

I already understood that a packet enters chains in the ''nat'' table only if it is the _first_ packet of a connection. In that case, we may do SNAT in the POSTROUTING chain of the ''nat'' table. So, the packets arrive to the POSTROUTING chain of the ''mangle'' table with the source IP address changed (if it''s said by the rules of the

Hello, today I wanted to remove one drive from raid1, and people at #btrfs advised me to use ''-dconvert=single'' before ''btrfs device delete''. I thought of adding ''-mconvert=dup'' too, but the kernel does not let me do that. It looks like ''dup'' is disallowed for an array of multiple devices. So, to go back to a single-drive

Hi! I''m still trying to solve the problem, about which I already posted in these lists... I''ve been trying to understand where packet routing and NAT is being done. The schemes are quite clear, when it''s about the _first_ packet of a NAT connection (when it enters the NAT table). But it isn''t that clear about the packets NAT''ed by the connection