similar to: FW: Signatures ...

I am running Pentium D 930 with 2 gigs of ram. Fedora Core 6 with Xen enabled. I am able to start the install and it goes to the first stage of needing to be rebooted. I restart the Domain and it starts to finalize the windows install. And is fine until it starts asking for serial numbers or computer names. Then all of a sudden the guest freezes. The guest CPU goes to zero and so does the

Quick question: I was trying to verify signature file rsync-2.6.0.tar.gz.sig for latest version or rsync and am getting: gpg: Signature made Thu Jan 01 11:14:08 2004 PST using DSA key ID 4B96A8C5 gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found I've checked for this key id but have not found it. Yes I have imported samba-pubkey.asc but still not go... Thanks in advance, Dave G.

Hi all, I've come across this issue today, and I think it might be a bug (or a feature ;) ). I've been testing Samba 3 on Debian Stable using the Samba packages from backports.org, which is says is version 3.0.2a. I've been testing Samba as a storage server in our NT4 Domain and have been playing with a bash script to set up user directories and permissions. Samba is set up with

This is more on the line of "Open Source Jobs." Official description below and at <http://www.xythos.com/home/xythos/ about/jobs_senior_tech_support_engineer.html>. You can contact me at dking@xythos.com if you're curious about the company, or our actual recruiter at recruit@xythos.com. Xythos sells a document management system (a J2EE system), and is looking for a

William E. Dent will be away from Wednesday August 30, 2000 to Tuesday September 5, 2000. Mail is being forwarded to wedent@home.com. Original Message Text follows: ---------------------------------------------------------- Send samba mailing list submissions to samba@lists.samba.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

Dear all, my colleagues and I have to write some R code for some of our projects. I would like to ask you help to organize us a little. a. Do you know if there is any system that can convert our R scripts to html pages with some nice dependency graphs (which functions calls which). b. Could you please suggest me an easy way to exchange the R code with my colleagues. I know about these version

Hello all, I`ve tried to run dovecot many times in my system (Conectiva Linux 9) and was unable to do so. For some reason it gives this message and quits - never runs. My system: Linux ba.gazetaweb.com 2.4.21-28872cl #1 Sex Mar 21 22:02:49 BRT 2003 i686 unknown I`m migrating from UW-IMAPD to dovecot. I've compiled it from sources, using default configurations. Any help

Hi Kevin/All, I''m a rails/ruby noob. Have put a rails app in production on Windows :-) We have put our java apps in production using SUSE. If you can throw some light On "SUSE is gorgeous but slow" -- it will help us. Is only ruby/rails slow on Suse OR is it considered to be generally slow distro for all apps ? If slow for most apps, how much Performance hit is that ?

Helo List, Sorry I missed the rest of my email in my previous post. Please see below. I'm having an issue using the AND (&) operator evaluation in the code of my dialplan. The dial plan is coded to detect inbound DTMF digits from callers. key "1" is equivalent to "yes" and key "2" is equivalent to "no" in two diferent contexts in the dial plan.

Hi, folks. I was wondering if any of you could point me in the right direction. Using R 3.3.3 (and later), on an IBM Power LPAR, Red Hat 7 PPC64le, markdown build fails as below. > install.packages("markdown") trying URL 'https://cloud.r-project.org/src/contrib/markdown_0.8.tar.gz' Content type 'unknown' length 80583 bytes (78 KB)

Paul Johnson wrote: > On Thursday 13 March 2008 01:27:23 pm Paul Johnson wrote: > > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: not available > > Type: application/pgp-signature > > Size: 189 bytes > > Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. > > Url : > >

Paul Johnson wrote: > On Thursday 13 March 2008 03:53:14 pm vitamin wrote: > > > > Yes it's a bug. Only not that they are being stripped. But that you sending > > them to the mailing list in the first place. DO NOT send them - that's all > > > > You do realize that wine would be the exception in the open source world by > banning the preferred

This is a flame war. Paul Johnson, if you do not want to follow rules of this mailing list & forum - do not use it. Closing topic.

Hello Is it possible to verify signatures of exe files? like sigcheck or sigverif does? there are *.cat files in windows\system32\catroot\ - can I open these files in Linux and dump containing information (filename:sha1 hash)? does mscat.h define some functions to do it? thanks

On Wed, 13 Feb 2013, Karel Zak wrote: > Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:01:54 +0100 > From: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com> > To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > Cc: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com, sandeen@redhat.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs_mkfs: wipe old signatures from the device > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 07:27:53AM +1100, Dave

Hi all, I repost the message about the signatur because I've not had any response. This time I hopefuly to get some ideas. When we put the parameter "server signing = auto or Yes" in smb.conf, the Windows XP clients can no longer connect to the samba (3.0.2), the "net use \\server\ipc$ /u:user password" return error 64. If I disabled the "server signing" the

When you define a ''signature'' in AWS it seems not to allow you to change the types in the return depending on the circumstances. On the other hand the xmlrpc spec seems specifically to disallow the return of both a result and a fault code/string - it must be one or the other. Is there a way around this or does everying using AWS for xmlrpc break the standard? Have I missed

I just ran up2date on new Centos-3.1 installation and received about 5 of these errors. Is this something to be concerned about? The package kernel-2.4.21-15.0.4.EL is signed with an unknown GPG signature. Continue The package kernel-utils-2.4-8.37.3 is signed with an unknown GPG signature. Continue? The package GConf2-2.2.1-4 is signed with an unknown GPG signature. Continue? It is using the

Hi, After discussion with Anton, I did the whole thing in a little bit different way (please see the attached patch). It again looks like reinvented wheel for LLVM experts, I suppose, but it works. What I want to achieve is to generate real (with all variadic arguments) call signature for each variadic and external function, without the "vararg" keyword and without the "...",

> It seems fine if the mismatched types are the types that can work with > trunc or ext. But other types, for example, structs, may not work. In > general, if a parameter is of type t1, and its argument is of type t2, > what value of the argument can we expect? Will it be a random value of > type t2? The call to function with mismatched signature yields undefined behavior. So,