similar to: Disk accounting with LVM Snapshots

Hello, I have this bug report that I have filed. Is there any specific reason why samba behaves this way, and doesn't use the unix semantics? Since this is even more restrictive than unix semantics, I'm more inclined to call it a bug until I know it's supposed to be this way. Any ideas? ----- Forwarded message from Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> ----- From: Mike Fedyk

I tried installing with several options (noacpi noapm; noprobe; noprobe skipddc noacpi noapm nodma). Always I get the same error. BUT this is not in fac a CentOS problem at all, because I get the same error always when I boot from hd (Fedora Core), IF there is a CD in the CD-ROM drive. (I tried with CentOS 1/4, CentOS 2/4 and a HP printer software CD.) It must be something with the CD drive!

Is anyone else getting messages from the lists.digium.com mail server with errors about a mail loop? I've been getting this for the last few weeks, but I don't have any list software on my server. Any ideas?

Using samba 4.0.9 as an AD DC (no other domain servers). Since my UIDs and GIDs have changed, I was doing cleanup: find /srv/svn/ -xdev '(' -nouser -o -nogroup ')' -ls I noticed this was very slow -- iostat reported only about 2tps and 50kB/s to my disks. So I timed it with nsswitch.conf users & groups set to "files" vs. "files winbind": # with

okay, my needs have been met. Thanks much. Now, for the sake of Google, could someone respond with how Asterisk likes single vs. HT vs. dual core vs. dual cpu, etc.? --Mike > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:57:12 -0800 > From: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@mikefedyk.com> > Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Processor Update? > To:

Is it possible to have nested MySQL queries in extensions.conf? Ie, perform a query, grab a value, and then jump to another location in the dialplan and do another query based on that original value. I'm having problems with the result and fetchid's and I'm not sure if it's even possible to do this or not. Thanks, Doug. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

I've been experimenting with LVM and snapshots under Centos 4.4 recently, and have found performance to be horrible while a snapshot of a logical volume exists. I expected some performance degradation with a snapshot in place due to my understanding of the copy-on-write behavior, but my system becomes almost unusable when writing to my system with a snapshot in place. For example, I can

Hello, There are 3 PRI's connected to the card each from different operators. Especially echo occured on span 3 is really annoying. Configuration files are as follows. Is there something wrong in conf ? Zapata.conf -------------------------- [channels] context=default switchtype=euroisdn usecallerid=yes hidecallerid=no callwaiting=yes usecallingpres=yes callwaitingcallerid=yes

Hi all in the ShoreWall community, [please CC me since I''m not on the list] I had been using FIAIF for a little while, and the setup of ShoreWall has been much easier, the config for each operation in one place, and I''m very happy with it. That said, it looks like one of the concepts could be taken a bit further. In this case, it is actions. To get the process started, I

Ok... I am reluctant to ask this question as I believe that it may be like asking what someones favorite linux distribution is... but I need to make an informed decision. We are getting ready to upgrade from a TE210P to a quad T1 card with echo cancellation. I am trying to decide between the Sangoma card and the Digium card. I need this to have great quality and I need it to work well. I would

Take a look at this output from lsof: smbd 11490 0 8u REG 3,3 55296 1136647 Maintenanc.fp5 afpd 31010 0 2u REG 3,3 3207 1136655 auction - envelope.rtf afpd 31010 0 5u REG 3,3 4156 1136656 Word Work File L 1 afpd 31010 0 8u REG 3,3 55296 1136647 Maintenanc.fp5 smbd 31386 0 9u REG 3,3 4156 1136656 Word Work

(resent without HTML) On 07/14/2013 05:56 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > 1c54d77 (x86: partial unification of asm-x86/bitops.h, 2008-01-30) > changed a bunch of btrl/btsl instructions to btr/bts, with the following > justification: > > The inline assembly for the bit operations has been changed to remove > explicit sizing hints on the instructions, so the assembler will

1c54d77 (x86: partial unification of asm-x86/bitops.h, 2008-01-30) changed a bunch of btrl/btsl instructions to btr/bts, with the following justification: The inline assembly for the bit operations has been changed to remove explicit sizing hints on the instructions, so the assembler will pick the appropriate instruction forms depending on the architecture and the context. Unfortunately,

Hello. On a server running 2.4.25, I have the two following errors in the kernel logfile: Unexpected dirty buffer encountered at do_get_write_access:618 (08:11 blocknr 920707) Unexpected dirty buffer encountered at do_get_write_access:618 (08:11 blocknr 920707) Should I worry about them (disk failure, filesystem damage) ? Thanks. As an addition what does the pair '08:11' means ? Is

Hello. Has anybody knows how run two asterisk process in one hardware? (each one with its own configuration?) Thanks Juan Salas.

Christoph Hellwig wrote: > There are a lot of variables when using qemu. > > The most important one are: > > - the cache mode on the device. The default is cache=writethrough, > which is not quite optimal. You generally do want to use cache=none > which uses O_DIRECT in qemu. > - if the backing image is sparse or not. > - if you use barrier - both in the host

Hi, I just read a pressrelease from VON that Digium will soon be releaseing a couple of new cards. What got me interested was: "The TE420P and TE415P support 128ms of G.168 (2002)-compliant echo cancellation across their entire 128 channels." Does anyone know when thease will be released and what they will cost when released? Thanks!

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon at gmail.com> wrote: > The instructions btr and bts are perfectly valid, and have existed since > Intel 386. GNU as supports them fine. Unfortunately, LLVM does not > support them, and barfs with: > > error: ambiguous instructions require an explicit suffix > > Fix this problem by disambiguating it

Anyone on this list have extensive experience with BTS? http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/2009/03/open-bts.html Please email me, particularly if you have experience in deploying over multiple cells covering large geographical areas (200k's sq). Regards, Dean Collins Cognation Inc dean at cognation.net <mailto:dean at cognation.net> +1-212-203-4357 New York

Jim Grosbach wrote: > To say that another way, is the assembler correctly diagnosing a previously > unnoticed problem in the project source code, or is the assembler not > behaving correctly according the the documented Intel assembly mnemonics? Where are the authoritative instruction set pages? If such a thing were readily available, why are there gaps in the current implementation? A