search for: reveils

When I do a search in squirrelmail, it will start giving several results, but then fails. I use squirrelmail via https. maillog reveils: file message-body-search.c: line 391 (message_body_search_ctx): assertion failed: (input->v_offset <= part->physical_pos) Squirrel mail browser interface reveils: ERROR: Connection dropped by IMAP server. Query: SEARCH CHARSET UTF-8 ALL TEXT {4} "text" Current versions (all up...

Hello everybody, it happened with my RH73 that the same partition (ext3 fs, of course) was mounted onto two different mount points ( "/" and "/mnt/removable" respectively) and a copy of files from one path to another (e.g. "cp /opt/myfile /mnt/removable/opt) reveiled to be an overwriting procedure. Now I have 0 byte size files on /mnt/removable (aka "/")

On 10/01/2015 03:57 PM, David Whitney wrote: > Hi mourik...are you saying these messages in the logs are new, as in > suddenly these messages are appearing? > > What version of Samba are you running? > We're on samba 4.2.4, sernet, on wheezy, AD. Running without any issues for more than a year. I have never noticed them before, and a quick search in the logs doesn't

When I do a search in squirrelmail, it will start giving several results, but then fails. I use squirrelmail via https. maillog reveils: file message-body-search.c: line 391 (message_body_search_ctx): assertion failed: (input->v_offset <= part->physical_pos) Squirrel mail browser interface reveils: ERROR: Connection dropped by IMAP server. Query: SEARCH CHARSET UTF-8 ALL TEXT {4} "text" Current versions (all up...

...still doesn't work. I checked the archives and it doesn't look like anyone has mentioned it yet. What does work is if I ssh to a machine I can telnet to localhost on the forwarded port, but connecting to the remote host on the forwarded port from another host doesn't work. netstat -a reveils: localhost.4000 *.* 0 0 0 0 LISTEN so it is still just binding to localhost instead of INADDR_ANY. p.s. This first test was on Solaris 2.6 sparc, and I am about to rebuild on Solaris 7 and 8, but I don't expect different results. -- David F. Newm...

Hi all, I recently acquired a laptop which brings the grand total of computers at three. 1 laptop, 1 server, 1 desktop. Now the problem I want to solve is the following: Because I work on both my laptop and desktop I would like to sync data in my prj/ directory to my server. So when I logon I sync my data from to server to the computer I currently working on and when I logoff I sync the data

If the problem machines are Windows 8 or later machines, it *could *be an SMB protocol negotiation issue. Windows 8 will attempt to negotiate SMB 3.11, but samba < 4.3 will cap at SMB 3.0. SMB 3.11 support came out with Samba 4.3.x. If this is the problem, you could either disable SMB2/3 on the Windows 8 box as noted in https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2696547, or possibly consider

Hi, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > Remember that RUFUS *does* set the > bootable flag and that, as I said already, my goofy motherboard refuses > to see a USB-connected device as being bootable if the device in question > contains a single partition that *does* have that flag set. If this theory is right then it would suffice to set bit 7 of byte 446 of the USB stick to 0 (first byte

Hello, First, I used thunderbird, and everything looks great. I tried my account in evolution and all the folders appear in one level and not in several as they were in thunderbird. Inbox Inbox.foo Inbox.bar instead of Inbox foo bar What could be the problem? Thanks! ===== Terry __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site

>>>>> Tomas Kalibera <tomas.kalibera at gmail.com> >>>>> on Fri, 5 Jan 2018 00:41:47 +0100 writes: > In practical terms, failing tests are not preventing anyone from using > an optimized BLAS/LAPACK implementation they trust. Building R with > dynamically linked BLAS on Unix is supported, documented and easy for > anyone who

Hello, I have the following message posted on the linux.samba newsgroup, but so far no response. Therefore I try again in this group, hoping that there are other people reading this group, and yes, that hopefully somebody can help me with my samba winbind problems. John Knappers Hello, "John" <jknappers@nospam.hotmail.com> schreef in bericht

Hi! I'm currently setting up my first mailsystem based on dovecot. For a far way, working with dovecot was very convenient, but after I had to integrate deliver, it became massivly painful. My components are postfix as MTA, postgresql as user database and dovecot as IMAP server. When translating the mail adresse into the account name, something goes terribly wrong (Mail adresses modified to

Hi all, when running Windows 2008 SBS on Xen 4.0.0, it disappears after some time (longest time I had it running was 20 minutes). In /var/log/xen/qemu-dm-win1.log I find: xc_map_foreign_batch: mmap failed: Cannot allocate memory xc_map_foreign_bulk error 12 Anyone any idea how to troubleshoot this? The Hypervisor has 16 GB of RAM, currently 2 GB are allocated to Dom0. This specific DomU has 8

Hi Tomas, Thanks for your reply. I find your response curious, however. Surely the identical() test is simply incorrect when catering for possibly different BLAS implementations? Or is it the case that conformant BLAS implementations all produce bit-identical results, which seems unlikely? (Sorry, I am unfamiliar with the BLAS spec.) Although whatever the answer to this theoretical question,

Hi all, James, After following James' suggestions fixing the several dbcheck errors, and having observed things for a few days, I'd like to update this issue, and hope for some new input again. :-) Summary: three DCs, all three running Version 4.5.10-SerNet-Debian-16.wheezy, samba-tool dbcheck --cross-ncs reports no errors, except for two (supposedly innocent) dangling forward links

Ady, before responding to you further, I'll ask you now to take onje more (fresh) look at this thread that I started over in the GParted forums: http://gparted-forum.surf4.info/viewtopic.php?pid=31834 Please note that I have now followed-up on myself and that I have added quite a lot of new & additional information. It now appears to me that GParted's reporting of the status of