similar to: samba support for local profiles

Hi list At the momtent I use samba as a pdc with tdbsam as passwd backend. I plan to use ldap and I already tried it out. Unfortunately I didn't find a way to disable roaming profiles. I used the smbldap tools. First there is the question if I should use add user script = /usr/sbin/smbldap-useradd -m "%u" with the -a (is a Windows User) option. If I don't, then windows account

Hello, I am having problems with all my clients (windows 2K and 9x) that don't have rights to modify printer settings, like tray or page size. At least the problem is consistent across all machines! ;) They can not print 11x17 pages, they can not change from defaults. We set things up rather quickly without much attention to detail and are paying for it now. The print drivers were installed

Dear all, few days ago I updated Debian to the latest stable and since then Dovecot is not working. I use Dovecot as LDA for Postfix and also for IMAP access. Also I used SASL and everything was ok before update. After I updated to Dovecot 2.1.7 (it used to be 1.x before) it looks like that e-mail delever is working but I can not configure IMAP access to work. All users/passwords are stored

Good Morning to All, I have a Red Hat 7.3 box with Samba 2.2.5 successfully integrated with a Windows 2000 domain. I am using a Win2K Domain Controller to hold all of the user accounts. I use WebMin 1.0 for the administration of my Linux box, and am able to pull up domain user accounts when putting permissions on files on the RH machine. I used a combination of resources to do this.

Hello, I was just looking into parsing some various logs to get notified when my application is not behaving correctly. Logcheck seems like the right tool but then I also notice auditd which is another log monitoring/reporting tool. Can someone explain if these two tools serve similar purposes or do they each have a different purpose? I've done a bit of reading but figure someone here

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 9 Feb 2018, at 22:30, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: >> >> On 9 Feb 2018, at 22:11, Dimitry Andric via Openmp-dev <openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 9 Feb 2018, at 20:40, Dimitry Andric via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>

On 22 Aug 2018, at 18:45, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 3:48 AM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: >> On 22 Aug 2018, at 05:58, Wei Mi <wmi at google.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: >>> On 16 Aug 2018, at 00:51,

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 20 Jul 2015, at 22:50, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: >>> On 17 Jul 2015, at 01:09, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu,

I noticed a problem with llvm-config.exe on Windows: >"c:\Users\andy\llvm+clang-6.0.0rc2-win64-msvc-release\bin\llvm-config.exe" --system-libs psapi.lib shell32.lib ole32.lib uuid.lib But then when I link against LLVM and these libs, I get: lld: error: LLVMSupport.lib(Process.obj): undefined symbol: __imp_CryptAcquireContextW lld: error: LLVMSupport.lib(RandomNumberGenerator.obj):

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 19 Jul 2015, at 01:44, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > ... >> Hm, strangely enough, this version of the script does not go further than the Phase 2 installation, and does not run any tests? This used to work fine for the release_36 branch. >> >> I think it is

On 9 Feb 2018, at 22:30, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > > On 9 Feb 2018, at 22:11, Dimitry Andric via Openmp-dev <openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> On 9 Feb 2018, at 20:40, Dimitry Andric via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On 9 Feb 2018, at 10:20, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org>

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 17 Jul 2015, at 01:09, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: >>> On 17 Jul 2015, at 00:31, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear

On 19 Jul 2015, at 00:17, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > > On 17 Jul 2015, at 01:09, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: >>> On 17 Jul 2015, at 00:31, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dimitry Andric" <dimitry at andric.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List (llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu)" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Tom Stellard" <tom at stellard.net> > Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 1:34:21 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev]

On 19 Jan 2018, at 17:11, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: >> On 18 Jan 2018, at 15:03, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: >>> >>> Am 2018-01-18 14:55, schrieb Dimitry Andric via llvm-dev: >>>> On 17 Jan 2018, at 18:53, Hans Wennborg

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 18 Jan 2018, at 15:03, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: >> >> Am 2018-01-18 14:55, schrieb Dimitry Andric via llvm-dev: >>> On 17 Jan 2018, at 18:53, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers >>> <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>>> Start

On 22 Aug 2018, at 05:58, Wei Mi <wmi at google.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 16 Aug 2018, at 00:51, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 09:49:16PM +0200, Dimitry Andric via llvm-dev wrote: > >> This is a regression caused by

On 19 Jul 2015, at 17:32, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > > On 19 Jul 2015, at 01:44, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > ... >> Hm, strangely enough, this version of the script does not go further than the Phase 2 installation, and does not run any tests? This used to work fine for the release_36 branch. >> >> I think it is

It seems this is a cmake vs autoconf thing. With cmake, it builds correctly, but with autoconf I get the same error as you. I probably shouldn't have made this change while we were in the release process as it was potentially risky :-/ I've reverted it now, so hopefully the next build should be problem free. Thanks, Hans On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:09 AM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at

On 31 Jan 2015, at 20:24, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: ... >> This is because the ulimit -t 600 was exceeded, as shown in dmesg: >> >> pid 78288 (python2.7), uid 1000, was killed: exceeded maximum CPU limit >> >> Can we bump the -t limit a little?