Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "gclient".
Did you mean:
client
2004 May 14
2
BUG IN SAMBA 3.0.4 ?
...les_sap
valid users = @administradores @manuales_sap
browseable = no
public = no
writable = no
write list = @administradores @manuales_sap
force create mode = 0770
force directory mode = 0770
directory mask = 0770
create mask = 0770
force user = administrador
force group = manuales_sap
[gclientes]
path = /home2/gclientes
valid users = @administradores @gclientes
browseable = no
public = no
writable = no
write list = @administradores @gclientes
force create mode = 0770
force directory mode = 0770
directory mask = 0770
create mask = 0770
force user = administrador
force group =...
2012 Mar 10
1
3.2.5 client connectivity issues...
...me cloud_c9
type protocol/client
option transport-type tcp
option remote-host xx.xxx.xx.xxx
option remote-subvolume brick
end-volume
mount -t glusterfs xxx.xx.xxx.xxx:cloud_c9 /mnt/cloud_c9 (or
mount -t glusterfs xxx.xx.xxx.xxx:cloud_c9 /mnt/cloud_c9 -o
log-level=WARNING,log-file=/root/gclient.out)
mount shows it but when/if I df -h, it's gone and /root/gclient.out
shows http://susepaste.org/97668544 (expires in 6 days).
No firewall rules in the way.
I can ping each and every host from each and every other host and the
client. I added my IP using "gluster volume set cloud_c9...
2016 May 31
0
[cfe-dev] GitHub anyone?
...handled independently from the VCS move.
The major blocker I see for the move is figuring out how we want to
coordinate versions between the related LLVM projects. I hear *terrible*
things about submodules, so I'd prefer a different sync mechanism, even if
it is a bad reimplementation of repo, gclient, submodules, and all the
other multi-repo sync tools.
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Renato Golin via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> There has been some discussion on IRC about SVN hosting and the perils
> of doing it ourselves. The consensus on the...
2016 May 31
30
GitHub anyone?
Folks,
There has been some discussion on IRC about SVN hosting and the perils
of doing it ourselves. The consensus on the current discussion was
that moving to a Git-only solution would have some disvantages, but
many advantages. Furthermore, not hosting our own repos would save us
a lot of headaches, admin costs and timed out connections.
TL;DR: GitHub + git submodules [1] could replace all the