search for: overwit

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1957 Bug #: 1957 Summary: New -K option overwites output file Classification: Unclassified Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 5.9p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ssh-keygen AssignedTo: unassigned-bugs...

...hen my Win95 clients save a file to a share that already has a file of the same name samba upcases it. To be completely accurate the files in question have numbers as thier first 8 chars then an extension of .mtr. So, 19991115.mtr on Win95, when copied, becomes 19991115.MTR on the share if it's overwiting a file called 19991115.mtr that already exists on the share. The only thing that gets upcased of course is the extension. I'm assuming that it would upcase the whole thing but havn't tested it yet. the parameters that I would think are pertinant to this are preserve case = yes...

Hi, Using Samba 3.0.1 on SuSE Linux (follow symlinks on) we noticed the following behaviour: A symbolic link to a file gets overwritten (replaced) by the target-file contents if the symbolic link is saved from a windows client. This is not what we expected, because a link represents the file, and so all actions executed on the link should actually be executed on the target-file, not the link. I

While in the upstream kernel I''m unable to find any use of XENPF_settime (and the DOM0_SETTIME alias of it) at all, in the 2.6.18 tree (and the forward ports of it) the function gets used only when ntp_synced() returns true (and - that''s minor - when independent_wallclock is not set). It would however seem to me that this doesn''t cover the case where the host clock gets

Hi, I need to join a Samba 4 DC to a Windows 2008 R2 Active Directory Domain. Do I need provisioned with --use-rfc2307 ? For example: samba-tool domain join samdom.example.com DC -U"SAMDOM\administrator" --use-rfc2307 I intend use SAMBA_INTERNAL DNS. Do I need provision with --intercative for select SAMBA_INTERNAL DNS ? Can I to inform other DNS existing (primary DNS) in my local

if you have N processes reading the same file sequentially (where file size is much greater than physical memory) from the same starting position, should I expect that all N processes finish in the same time as if it were a single process? In other words, if you have one process that reads blocks from a file, is it "free" (meaning no additional total I/O cost) to have another process

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2035 Priority: P5 Bug ID: 2035 Assignee: unassigned-bugs at mindrot.org Summary: Bugs intended to be fixed in 6.2 Severity: normal Classification: Unclassified OS: All Reporter: dtucker at zip.com.au Hardware: All Status: NEW Version: