search for: gclient

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