similar to: Forum

Hi Bruce Thank you very much for reaching out. This is likely to be a short discussion due to me potentially learning that my infrastructure possibly has shortfalls that I did not appreciate until just recently. What I was hoping to do is deploy Windows from a Thecus branded NAS. Natively the NAS does not support PXE, but with community created mods it is achievable. So with this mod

Thank you for the prompt reply. What you said is promising so if I may, with your help can we decipher what SYSLinux files goes where from the ground up? If this is too broad a question or may take up too much of your time then I understand and appreciate your help thus far. Richard -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Ferrell [mailto:bferrell at baywinds.org] Sent: Saturday, 17 November 2018

Hi Anfo, Windows 7 deployment is actually something I do from pxe... It does requires "extras" from Microsoft to build the windows install image, but they don't cost anything and it's a one time thing.? I'll have to locate my docs on the Windows deployment tool. PXE install of windows is the fastest Windows 7 Ultimate N install I've ever done... Much faster than

On 11/15/18 6:13 PM, Anfo via Syslinux wrote: > Hello all > > > > I was just hoping to see if there was a forum, or a patient individual kind > enough to help me configure PXELinux (I only understand the wiki to a > point). Apologies for using this medium to call for aid as I've been unable > to locate an alternative support channel. > > > > Richard

Hello, I am trying to convert three applications to multitenant, all of them have same structure difference is only in little functions and template designs. All of them using cattr_accessor for setting currencies and other data, and it works perfectly Now i added app_id as cattr_accessor to App model to use it in default_scope to implement multi-tenancy class App < ActiveRecord::Base

Hi, I'm looking at using Linux as a NAS / SAN device, and would like some input from other's who have done this before? How would it compare to commercial SAN devices, Thecus N8800SAS (http://www.thecus.com/products_over.php?cid=11&pid=177&set_language=english) or something similar to these? I would probably use hardware RAID 10, and could go with either SAS / SATA, and then

Hello again, Jeremy and other Samba experts, I'm sorry to be such a pain in your neck(s), but I still need your help in looking for help trying to find out why SMB2/3.1.1 in Samba 4.6.5 performs so much worse than SMB/1.5 in Samba 3.6.15 in scenarios with a huge number of small files. As requested by Jeremy, I have done wireshark "pcapng" captures of the four scenarios as

I ran into a problem that I couldn't resolve straight away, but would like to solve for sometime in the future. We have a Thecus storage server (similar to a Buffalo TeraByte, if that helps?) that has a Mac filesystem on it. The mother board was failing, but the drives are still OK. A new box has been added, so the urgency is sort of gone. I was going to try and back up the data to a new

Hello Samba experts, I have just successfully replaced the old default Thecus Samba version 3.5.16 on my Thecus NAS (32-bit Intel Atom, 3 GB RAM, i686 Thecus kernel 2.6.33) by a current Samba 4.6.5 build that I have cross-compiled myself from scratch. Note that so far, I am using the unchanged (i.e. exactly identical) old 3.5.16 smb.conf file for 4.6.5. Everything seems to work fine in

Hey, The recent discussion on NAS/SAN and the Thecus N8800 got me to thinking. Bit of background. I have an old Dual Athlon MP2800+ that I'm using for a home web/file server. It runs fine but between the noise of the various fans and it's location in the living room, I've been asked by my spouse to find a replacement for it that's smaller & quieter. Looking at the Thecus, and

Hello Samba experts, due to the "SambaCry" issue (CVE-2017-7494), I am trying to update the Samba server installation on my Thecus NAS (dating back to 2011) from version 3.5.16 to the current 4.6.4. So far, I have successfully * created a cross-compiling toolchain for the NAS (i686-nptl-linux-gnu) based on gcc-5.2 * compiled Python and Samba library dependencies for my

On 01/21/10 20:42, Jan Sjodin wrote: >>> Imo, a loop is simply a special kind of region, so a "filter" is perhaps the way to >>> go if you are interested in loops. Regions containing loops will have to be inspected >>> using the PST. >> >> Except loops that have multiple exits. they are not necessarily (single >> entry single exit) region, if

Hello Jeremy, thanks a million for your help and interest in tracking this down! :-) Am 13.06.2017 um 18:36 schrieb Jeremy Allison: > Can you get comparitive wireshark traces for the two cases ? > > That would help discover what the bottleneck is. I am not at all a network guy, but I hope that - maybe with a little more help from your part once I have tried to do so in practice - I

I have an original-label Infrant (now NetGear) ReadyNAS storage appliance that's been running for 8+ years. Except for replacing its power supply, it has not skipped a beat in all this time. I use it primarily as a backup device (via NFS) for a couple of Linux machines, (via SMB) for a couple of Windows PC's, and (via ftp) for web sites at my hosting provider. SMART+ reporting shows

On 01/08/10 14:20, ether wrote: > sorry that i forgot to change the subjuect > > > hi all, Hi ether, now a kind of more complete answer. > On 2010-1-7 0:11, John Mosby wrote: >> In LLVM we could add support for generalized CFG regions and >> RegionPasses. A region is a part of the CFG. The only information we >> have is, that it has one entry and one exit, this

On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 11:28 +0200, awl1 via samba wrote: > Hello Andrew, > > and many thanks for your fast reply! :-) > > Am 08.06.2017 um 11:05 schrieb Andrew Bartlett: > > I think the key to avoiding the issue is that you have listed rpc > > modules which are not modules. The only rpc server module is > > rpc_mdssvc_module. > > Ah, OK, I see - so I

Hi all. We are getting our first PRI line to use with Asterisk and one of the technical specifications is about framing, structured or unstructured. The main difference about them is almost clear for me: http://ckp.made-it.com/g704.html says: "G.704 is the framing specification for G.703. A carrier can 'steal' a 64kbps time slot (TS0) from a 2.048 Mbps line and use this to

All, having successfully compiled and set up Dovecot 2.2.29.1 on my Thecus NAS as a newbie without any further hassle, and already imported an external mail archive of ~15 GB into a lz4-compressed mdbox (with impressive performance on the old Intel Atom CPU!), I stumbled into a minor, but reproducible issue that might well be already known, but I haven't managed to find any pointers

I'm trying to create a 500GB lv volume on a 500GB physical volume, but can't: [root at francois-pc ~]# pvscan PV /dev/sdd VG freenas lvm2 [500.00 GB / 500.00 GB free] PV /dev/sdc VG thecus lvm2 [1010.00 GB / 910.00 GB free] PV /dev/mapper/ddf1_RAIDp2 VG VolGroup00 lvm2 [931.25 GB / 0 free] Total: 3 [2.38 TB] / in use: 3 [2.38 TB]

I have a generalized linear model to solve. I used package "geepack". When I use the correlation structure "unstructured", I get a messeage that- R GUI front-end has stopped working. Why this happens? What is the solution? The r codes are as follows: a<-read.table("d:/bmt.txt",header=T")