Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "d4_".
Did you mean:
d4
2007 Jan 05
3
Dovecot's deliver trouble (...probably bug?)
...t test.net; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:16:05 +0200
Message-ID: <459B9E84.9070607 at test.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:16:04 +0200
From: test uset <testuser at test.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060119)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: serge at test.net
Subject: =?KOI8-R?Q?=D4=C5=D3=D4_=D0=D2=CF=C8=CF=D6=C4=C5=CE=C9=D1?=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: "testuser at test.net"@test.net
Test message body.
------------------------------------
Here is an original message from e-mail client ( just to...
2014 Dec 19
3
PATH directive
...the PATH
directive, but the PATH *rules* are still valid in the command prompt,
right? Are still _all_ the rules valid? Are there any differences?
D3Q2: Are there any *different* "PATH rules" for the boot prompt,
whether using (typing-in) relative paths or absolute paths notation?
D4_ When typing in the boot prompt, we know that the ".c32" file name
extension is used as fallback. For example, (IIRC) if I type in the
boot prompt:
ls
then Syslinux will try to find such file name (or label), "as-is"
("ls"). If such exact file name (or label) is n...
2015 Jan 01
0
PATH directive
...d prompt,
> right? Are still _all_ the rules valid? Are there any differences?
No, there shouldn't be any differences.
> D3Q2: Are there any *different* "PATH rules" for the boot prompt,
> whether using (typing-in) relative paths or absolute paths notation?
Nope.
> D4_ When typing in the boot prompt, we know that the ".c32" file name
> extension is used as fallback. For example, (IIRC) if I type in the
> boot prompt:
>
> ls
>
> then Syslinux will try to find such file name (or label), "as-is"
> ("ls"). If s...
2014 Dec 19
0
PATH directive
On Thu, 18 Dec, at 07:47:18PM, Ady wrote:
> I have a question about the PATH directive. In fact, the question is
> not about how it is currently working, but about its intention or goal,
> or how it was supposed to work (or how it was thought about for the
> 5.00 release).
>
> Previous discussions about the PATH directive in the Syslinux Mailing
> List, and its
2014 Dec 18
2
PATH directive
I have a question about the PATH directive. In fact, the question is
not about how it is currently working, but about its intention or goal,
or how it was supposed to work (or how it was thought about for the
5.00 release).
Previous discussions about the PATH directive in the Syslinux Mailing
List, and its documentation (e.g. "PATH rules") left on me the
impression that it was
2015 Jan 02
2
PATH directive
...-in) relative paths or absolute paths notation?
>
> Nope.
>
Now I'm confused. You just mentioned different behaviors depending on
the type of notation, relative or absolute; perhaps not regarding c32
dependencies but regarding the explicitly-referenced c32 files.
> > D4_ When typing in the boot prompt, we know that the ".c32" file name
> > extension is used as fallback. For example, (IIRC) if I type in the
> > boot prompt:
> >
> > ls
> >
> > then Syslinux will try to find such file name (or label), "as-is"...