similar to: kernel panic on ext3

Dear libguestfs developers and users, it is my pleasure to welcome Hiroyuki Katsura as Google Summer of Code 2019 student for libguestfs! He will work on adding Rust bindings, to allow using libguestfs in Rust applications. You can read the project submission here: https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/projects/#6730007286644736 I'm the main mentor of this project, with Rich Jones, and Martin

Dear Eli, Thank you for your reply. My backend is based on and extends MIPS ISA and disables generating unaligned memory access instructions because my new 32-bit RISC ISA does not have them. In this case, an array of char string (i.e., its beginning address) is not 32-bit align. However, aligned memory access instructions (such as 32-bit LW) are used in this case, and hence my compiler cannot

This patch includes: - Event callback handlers - Tests related to events(410-430) --- generator/rust.ml | 38 ++++++- rust/src/base.rs | 24 +++-- rust/src/error.rs | 8 +- rust/src/event.rs | 158 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ rust/src/lib.rs | 2 + rust/tests/040_create_multiple.rs | 2 +-

I fixed based on comments. I'll send these two patches to this mailing list. - Fix Handle -> Handle<'a> - Add events Regards, Hiroyuki 2019年8月1日(木) 0:01 Pino Toscano <ptoscano@redhat.com>: > Hi Hiroyuki, > > On Tuesday, 30 July 2019 07:51:37 CEST Hiroyuki Katsura wrote: > > This patch includes: > > > > - Event callback handlers > > -

> Can you explain which errors did you get? I tried pod2markdown on a > couple of API longdesc's, and the result seemed OK. > Most probably we will need to write our own pod2markdown though, as > pod2markdown does not allow users to customize all the options that > the Pod::Markdown module has. Yes. Most of the results seemed OK. But, for example, translating

> Have you decided whether we need to commit the generated files > (Cargo.toml, Cargo.lock)? It looks like in this series those files > are still included and not added to .gitignore. I'm sorry I forgot adding Cargo.lock to .gitignore. I'll add it to .gitignore. However, I think Cargo.toml should be staged. This is because this is a file managed by hands. It contains

Dear community, I have developed a backend of new 32-bit RISC ISA, which does not have unaligned memory access instructions (e.g., LWL, LWR, SWL, and SWR in MIPS). Since char and short variables are not 32-bit alignment, these variables cannot be correctly accessed. Therefore, alignment member functions, especially getCharAlign() and getShortAlign() of TargetInfo class in

On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 08:37:20AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 01:28:12PM +0900, Hiroyuki Katsura wrote: >> > Have you decided whether we need to commit the generated files >> > (Cargo.toml, Cargo.lock)? It looks like in this series those files >> > are still included and not added to .gitignore. >> >> I'm sorry I forgot

Hi, We are running into a problem with a Samba setup and would like to know if a current fix or workaround is at all possible. Our setup is a NetApp filer serving NFS v4 that is mounted by Solaris and Linux servers. On those servers we are using Samba to create shares of those NFSv4 mounted filesystems. We are migrating to this NFSv4 setup from an existing Solaris NFSv3+Posix ACL setup that also

I have a situation where I need to share, via Samba, a filesystem mounted via NFSv4. I'm struggling with the best way to make Samba see the NFSv4 ACLs and enumerate them to provide the proper SMB/CIFS access to the files, instead of "Access Denied" errors that I currently get. Looking at the Samba source, the only obvious NFSv4 stuff appears to be the following: - zfsacl, available

> On Dec 3, 2015, at 17:24, Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 03:54:21PM -0700, Nick Couchman wrote: >> I have a situation where I need to share, via Samba, a filesystem mounted via NFSv4. I'm struggling with the best way to make Samba see the NFSv4 ACLs and enumerate them to provide the proper SMB/CIFS access to the files, instead

hi there - is it possible to share a directory via samba and (kernel-)nfsv4 in parallel and make samba use (ie.: read, write and enforce) nfsv4 acls to implement winnt-acls? i know that using nfs3 and posix acls is working halfway okay, but couldn't find anything useful for nfsv4 and the associated acls - sorry if i missed something obvious. i played around with the nfs4acl_xattr and

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeremy Allison" <jra at samba.org> > To: "Nick E Couchman" <nick.couchman at seakr.com> > Cc: samba at lists.samba.org > Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 6:13:51 PM > Subject: Re: [Samba] Linux & NFSv4 ACLs > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 06:03:39PM -0700, Nick Couchman wrote: >> >> > On Dec 3,

On 3 May 2018 at 03:23, Hiroyuki Chishiro via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > However, aligned memory access instructions (such as 32-bit LW) are > used in this case, and hence my compiler cannot correctly access char > string written in C. This hardware situation was reasonably common in the past, but code still accessed objects not aligned to 32-bits. The compiler

Good morning, folks. I'm involved in a project to enforce NFSv4 ACL's across a variety of storage platforms, in particular NetApps sharing NFS. That works fiine with the NetApp NFS qtrees, but we'd like to share those with CIFS clients as well. This works, and restricts access the way we expect NFSv4 ACL's to work, but the Windows clients cannot view any of the security settings

Hi, I've been working on some systems trying to get kerberized nfsv4 and kerberized web services going on 7. Kerberized nfsv4 was working with 7.0, but with the 7.1 release it stopped working, the key difference between the two setups is that gssproxy wasn't being used with 7.0, but seems to be key with 7.1. The problem I am encountering with Kerberized NFSv4 is that the directory will

Hi, Just out of curiosity what is in nfsv4 delegation that you think would give a benefit on your configuration? If I read back the thread you seem to have dovecot configured with director ring in front of the backends. In that case Dovecot already manages storage in a way that only one of the backends is accessing each users data at a time. So I can?t see anything but problems form enabling

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeremy Allison" <jra at samba.org> > To: "Nick E Couchman" <nick.couchman at seakr.com> > Cc: samba at lists.samba.org > Sent: Friday, December 4, 2015 1:22:06 PM > Subject: Re: [Samba] Linux & NFSv4 ACLs > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 07:31:36PM -0700, Nick Couchman wrote: >> >> Try these pages (U

Dear Rich I waited for Pino’s response because I failed to divide this patch into two commits as Pino thought. Is it OK? Regards, Hiroyuki > On Aug 6, 2019, at 23:16, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > > > These look fine to me and they don't break the build so I have > pushed both. > > Thanks. > > Rich. > > -- > Richard Jones,

hi all, i'm managing a large installation of a dovecot cluster in director + NFS backend architecture and we are moving from NFSv3 to NFSv4. Our NFS server is a Netapp in clustered mode and reading technical specs of NFSv4 delegation feature it seems that enabling delegation in this type of dovecot architecture should bring great benefits: only one backend server access a specific mailbox at a