similar to: Tell me pls. ext3 for 2.2.20 (Dibian) in accessible anything ?

Hi, I installed a 2.4.18 kernel, with ext3 support and make a tune2fs -j /dev/sdxxx with all partitions, now I want to run a 2.2.20 kernel, I want to know if I can use the patch for 2.2.20 series (0.0.7a) without problems with my new ext3 partitions, or I must mount it as ext2 from 2.2.20, greetings and reply to admin@cideweb.com, I'm not subscribed to the list.

Hello, Now that kernel 2.2.20 is out with security fixes, I'd be interested in using it with ext3. The latest patch for 2.2.19, 0.0.7a, applies with some offset (both with and without kdb), and even compiles (without kdb), but I scarcely know what I am doing so haven't tried it yet. Could people in the know enlighten me on that point? I guess there is little chance for another ext3

Hello All, I have a production server that is running 2.2.20. This server *has* to be up 24X7 - what I'm wondering is: 1) Is ext3 on 2.2.20 rock stable? Or, would you recommend that I just stay with ext2? 2) I have looked far and wide for a the ext3 patch for 2.2.20 - where can I find it? 3) Were are the e2fsprogs that are appropriate to run with the 2.2.X kernel series? Thanks,

One of our servers (false) just oopsed. In the middle of lunch. Any advise? On console: false kernel: Assertion failure in journal_start() at transaction.c line 245: "handle->h_transaction->t_journal == journal" In kernel log (ran it through ksymoops): Nov 13 12:35:37 false kernel: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000 Nov 13 12:35:37

In the Red Hat Linux spec file for the 2.2.19 kernel, there is a note not to enable ext3 and LFS at the same time. I'm wondering whether this is an old note, and that it is safe to use ext3 0.0.7a on a system with LFS enabled, or if there are still issues with it. I'm aware that 0.0.7a is a really old version, and 2.2 isn't the most modern kernel, but it is what I have to work with.

I'm trying to get Samba up and running and having a terrible time. It says that I should be able to run nmap and see that 137 and 139 are open - which they are not. I have not added any restrictions in smb.conf, do not have a firewall running and I have increased the log level to 5 to see all of the messages. It says that it is talking on 137 but it kind of looks like it's not talking

Howdy, I am just starting to use rsync and now have an rsync server set up to back up our various machines. I recently started getting an error that is confusing and I can't find info documented on it. I searched the news group and found it mentioned but no solution yet. I get the error when sync'ing from a Solaris 8 machine to my Solaris 8 server. stat

Hello , I am trying to install an ingress qdisc on a slackware 7 , 2.2.20 box . I have installed iproute2-2.4.7-now-ss010824.tar.gz . I `ve built all the QOS stuff in my kernel . Playing with cbq sfq etc works ok . However when i try to setup ingress i get the infamous RNETLINK message tc qdisc add dev eth0 handle ffff: ingress RTNETLINK answers: No such file or directory Something weird ,

Hey everyone, I am planning to set up a debian server using the 2.2 kernel tree (kernel 2.2.20) I have tried applying the 2.2.19 patch once but it spewed out some rejects. I went ahead and selected yes to the second fs development code. When I converted all my partitions to 'ext3' (by adding a journal) everything seemed to go well, but when I rebooted (bad shutdown) the computer during

I am trying to compile 2.2.20 with both ext3 and reiserfs (to easily migrate from reiserfs to ext3 :-) All patches merge nicly, but compile fails because "buffer_journaled" is defined by both reiserfs and ext3. I looked at the "2.2.14 ext3 + reiserfs incompatibility"-thread on the kernel list and figured out that renaming "buffer_journaled" in fs/buffer.c and

My system had the following error sent to syslog: kernel: Assertion failure in ext3_free_blocks() at balloc.c line 358: "bh->b_committed_data != NULL" Immediately before that with the same timestamp was a sendmail entry. The system locked up shortly after that. I never saw an oops. I was tailing /var/log/messages in a terminal. That syslog entry was not saved to disk. I have

Hi there, I was wondering if you could give me some pointers as to how to get rid of the spooge of microsoft from our office, and have samba-2.2.2 assuming file sharing duties (read this as the Boss isn't happy with all the win2K crashes on the NIC's) The machine is a Pent-III 850Mhz w/256MB, dual NIC's, and 2 HD's (IDE) with /dev/hda1 being where the OS is stored, and /dev/hdb1

I have configured autoexpunge on some folders: namespace inbox { inbox = yes location = mailbox Junk { auto = subscribe autoexpunge = 30 days special_use = \Junk } mailbox Trash { auto = subscribe autoexpunge = 2 weeks special_use = \Trash } prefix = separator = / } After adding these and restarting, logging in and out several times, I still see messages

> On Dec 22, 2015, at 9:49 AM, Dominik Breu <dominik at dominikbreu.de> wrote: > the autoexpunge feature only removes mails wich have the \Delete Flag so no deletion of mails wich doesn't have this Flag(see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4315#section-2.1 or http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Tools/Doveadm/Expunge) > > you could run a cron job with a doveadm move comando to move the

Hi! I've upgraded my seawolf to ext3fs with the packages from Roswell (kernel, filesystem, mount, ....), but when doing 'tune2fs -j', it mentions 'Ext3fs version 0.0.5b'...? Isn't version 0.0.7a the latest?? Why isn't that version included in the Roswell kernel, but an older version is? And how can i upgrade my version of ext3fs? Thanks! Bart Verwilst

On Dec 22, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Teemu Huovila <teemu.huovila at dovecot.fi> wrote: > > The autoexpunge feature does not check the \Deleted flag. > > Are any errors logged in "doveadm log errors"? Could you post your complete output of doveconf -n please. That?s what I thought. If I run expunge from doveadm manually, it will work as expected. I just never seem to get

Just got another core-dump from Dovecot's imap process on our mail server. Dovecot 2.2.20 Solaris 10 / x86 Maildir Output from syslog: Dec 14 10:58:12 mail dovecot: [ID 583609 mail.crit] imap(oling): Panic: file imap-fetch.c: line 554: assertion failed: (ctx->client->output_cmd_lock == NULL || ctx->client->output_cmd_lock == cmd) Dec 14 10:58:15 mail dovecot: [ID 583609

A patch that implements acls on ext3 for kernel 2.2.x is available at http://moldybread.net/patch/kernel-2.2/ It looks to be stable. Beat it, break it.

Hello, I have a serious problem with dovecot and mbox format. dovecot returns the same UIDL for new messages and as result some MUAs don't retrieve new mail. UIDs returned by UIDL command look like 000000*1c*49006cec And there is a moment when dovecot stops incrementing marked digits. In other words when new message arrive to mbox, UIDL command returns used UID. I'll show with example:

Dear User, the message with following attributes has not been delivered, because contains an infected object. Sender = samba@samba.org (may be forged) Recipients = blizz@rtf-15.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua Subject = something for you Message-ID = i1OK4sac009347 Antivirus filter report: --- Dr.Web report --- Following virus(es) has been found: infected with Win32.HLLM.Foo.41984 Dr.Web detailed report: