similar to: Re: export user from Active Directory

Bryan... NOBODY CARES how many times Chris is wrong. NOBODY CARES what you prove on this point. Whether Chris is right, wrong or stoopid is NOT proper fodder for this (CENTOS) list. Chris being wrong is *strictly* a "Bryan Fixation". Part of YOU growing up is YOU realizing that whether Chris is or is not wrong is UNIMPORTANT to ANYTHING that you or anybody important to you think is

Claims to have fixed the write performance issues with multiple volumes. Haven't tried it personally (I do not have a 9500S card, and I have only installed one once for a client). NOTE: This (9.2.1.1) is an actual, formal, supported release -- not an unsupported engineering release. -- Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org | (please excuse

The result of continued inquiry ... http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/09/linux-servers-eccentric-practices-for.html Not even spell-checked yet nor read-over well. I will clean it up later today. -- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The best things in life are NOT free - which is

> How's forever work for you? ;-> Absolutely FINE thank you! When your WizWonder package is housebroken, let me try it if I'm interested. Until then, a (stubbornly) broken distro will persuade me to try something else. That's why I left Windows, I guess, if you prognosticate correctly, it will be why I leave RedHat/CentOS. btw this has nothing to do with Firewalls at

The laws already exist: Disturbing the peace, Misappropriation of public funds, Prohibition on unfunded mandates. What's lacking is prosecutors, judges, and juries who see the politicians as getting in the way of the statesmen and the people. To drag this back towards On Topic, it seems to me that the ntp folks might be petitioned to write up and submit to the Congress, a paper

I wrote part of a FAQ last November, and if you're interested in the breakdown of GCC, GLibC and kernel adoption since Red Hat Linux 4.0, you'll want to read this: http://www.geocities.com/thebs413/RH-Distribution-FAQ-3.html I've been loosely working on a "Linux Configuration Management" book covering Red Hat distributions since. I might update this FAQ if I have

Ed Clarke wrote: > The ppc64 arch is likely to become much more important > once the Sony-Toshiba-IBM processor gets into consumer > hands. Understand that "Cell" is not a "generic" CPU. It is a configuration-fixed "Power-based core" with vector units attached. In a nutshell, it's like having a "moderate performing" single CPU platform with

From: "Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org>" <thebs413 at earthlink.net> > I wrote a pre-sale evaluation back in January 2005 here: > http://lists.leap-cf.org/pipermail/leaplist/2005-January/000532.html > ... Tyan S2895 -- nForce Pro 2200+2050 Just know that the pre-sale evaluation was of the nForce4, and didn't take the nForce Pro 2200 and 2200+2050

It seems that unstable PowerNow support on the Tyan S2895 is not limited to Linux according to this review: http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-296-1.htm Their solution was to upgrade the BIOS as well. -- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The best things in life are NOT

From: Bryan J. Smith [mailto:thebs413 at earthlink.net] > > Bowie Bailey <Bowie_Bailey at BUC.com> wrote: > > It is an interesting choice. It supports multi-master > > replication which I will need and has some GUI management > > utilities. > > Anyone know of any problems with it? > > Only that many people on this list have been ignorant of what >

I'm not on the YUM lists, so I'll post this here in the hope it will make someone happy. I'll forward the concept to Seth for consideration (if he doesn't see it here). This is a simple "createrepo" hack that would require corresponding support in the "yum" binary as well. I'm not sure this would work, but it's just an idea I figure I might as well

Just to clarify, I'm looking at this from an application layer Point of View. One of the reasons why I'm looking at it that way, is because Tim said he was looking at LinuxHA..."application level" redundancy that uses IP. Tim, just to let you know, I don't believe that LinuxHA will work in the way you described, only because of the different IP ranges. It looks like Linux

From: "Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org>" > So? I've been authenticating Samba against NIS servers since > the mid-'90s ... > You can even use pGINA to replace your NT/200x/XP login to > authenticate against other servers ... > If you are the former, you _can_ switch _away_ from CIFS altogether! > Samba will _never_ reverse engineer all of

Since good server designs have come up in the past, I wanted to point out a "low-cost" server option that has good I/O, and the vendor offers _your_choice_ of not only Fedora Core or Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but _also_ CentOS _shipped_ with it! IN-A-NUTSHELL ... Starting at just over $750, you can get a single Socket-939 Opteron 1xx (dual-core is an option) system with up to 4GiB of

Anyone try this yet? ftp://ftp.valinux.com/pub/software/kernel/beta/2.4.5-beta2va3.11/ List of SRPM contents follows. -- TheBS atomic-lookup.patch atomicalloc.patch byteprofiling.patch comtrol-1.23.patch configs-2.4.5.tar.gz copy-user-reschedule.patch dac960-enclosure-quiet.patch dma-livelock-fix.patch e100-1.5.5.tar.gz e1000-3.0.7.tar.gz eepro100-speedo-1.patch emu10k1-tone.patch

From: Bryan J. Smith [mailto:thebs413 at earthlink.net] > > CORAID will _refuse_ to allow anything to access to volume after one > system mounts it. It is not multi-targettable. SCSI-2, iSCSI and > FC/FC-AL are. AoE is not. As I understand it, Coraid will allow multiple machines to mount a volume, it just doesn't handle the synchronization. So you can have more than one

From: Prasad Pillarisetti <prasad.pillarisetti at gmail.com> > ***Do you perform downtimes just for the purpose of rebooting the systems? > ***Is there a recommended interval Linux system should be rebooted? Okay, here's my short answer: Regardless of OS, you should _always_ reserve dates/times for preventive maintenance on a regular basis. But I agree with most others, unless

I've been reading back through the archives, really detailed, especially a select few people. And I promise, this is the last time I'm going to say this. I think CentOS stands great on itself, and you don't need to define many things is dislike of other distro. I know many of us (at least us Americans) like to put things in terms of "versus" as much as we can. And I am too

From: Chris Mauritz <chrism at imntv.com> > I agree completely. Unfortunately, even though I've killfiled the > biggest offender, I'm still getting a lot of the noise since people > continue to feed him. I assume the former is a reference to me. As far as the latter, you might re-think your singularity focus. As I've said before, you can't complain about me

From: Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at suespammers.org> > Actually, there is another neat trick for rpm based systems. > You see, rpm, prior to removing anything, will rename that to ${NAME}.OLD. > So, libc.so.6 becomes libc.so.6.OLD, and then removed. > As we all know, if that library is currently open by any running process, > it won't be imediately removed (even tho you