similar to: NFS help

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:21 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > Larry Martell wrote: >> We have 1 system ruining Centos7 that is the NFS server. There are 50 >> external machines that FTP files to this server fairly continuously. >> >> We have another system running Centos6 that mounts the partition the files >> are FTP-ed to using NFS. > <snip>

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:42 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > Larry Martell wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:21 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: >>> Larry Martell wrote: >>>> We have 1 system ruining Centos7 that is the NFS server. There are 50 >>>> external machines that FTP files to this server fairly continuously. >>>>

Larry Martell wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:21 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: >> Larry Martell wrote: >>> We have 1 system ruining Centos7 that is the NFS server. There are 50 >>> external machines that FTP files to this server fairly continuously. >>> >>> We have another system running Centos6 that mounts the partition the >>>

This should be an easy one. I'm trying to get postfix going. I've never done this before. I followed the directions at http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix. I opened port 25: iptables -I INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 25 -j ACCEPT Here's an attempt to send mail: [motor at localhost motor]# mail -v larry.martell at gmail.com Subject: test test . EOT larry.martell at gmail.com...

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Larry Martell <larry.martell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Clint Dilks <clintd at scms.waikato.ac.nz> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Larry Martell <larry.martell at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Pete Biggs <pete at biggs.org.uk> wrote:

Hi Chandler, There were five SEH releated patches posted in two threads in the last days. Two different patches in Martell e-mail starting this thread: the win64 seh (llvm) and the register names Three more related SEH patches in another thread: one for win64 seh clang, one for MinGW toolchain and another for unreachable prologue. To clarify and allow proper reviews for the different patches I

Hi Yaron, I know you sent me some emails before about regression testing on MSYS2 So you might have some idea about this I am getting a regression error on check-llvm. With the llvm/trunk/test/ExecutionEngine/Interpreter/intrinsics.ll FAIL: LLVM :: ExecutionEngine/Interpreter/intrinsics.ll (7635 of 14266) > ******************** TEST 'LLVM :: >

This test results in UNSUPPORTED on my system, since config.enable_ffi = "OFF". This is the result of LLVM_ENABLE_FFI which is OFF by default. Is it turned ON in your build? 2015-07-28 17:32 GMT+03:00 Martell Malone <martellmalone at gmail.com>: > Hi Yaron, > > I know you sent me some emails before about regression testing on MSYS2 > So you might have some idea about

> > Is it turned ON in your build? > Yes it is turned on in my build here is my build script PATH=/mingw64/bin:$PATH FFI_INCLUDE_DIR="$(pkg-config --cflags libffi)" > FFI_INCLUDE_DIR=$(echo $FFI_INCLUDE_DIR | sed 's|-I||g') > > /mingw64/bin/cmake.exe \ > -G"MSYS Makefiles" \ > -DCMAKE_MAKE_PROGRAM="/usr/bin/make.exe" \ >

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 7:51 AM, mark <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > On 10/24/16 03:52, Larry Martell wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:42 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: >>> >>> Larry Martell wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:21 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Larry Martell <larry.martell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Alexander Dalloz <ad+lists at uni-x.org> > wrote: > > Am 11.05.2017 um 20:30 schrieb Larry Martell: > >> > >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Larry Martell <larry.martell at gmail.com > > > >> wrote: > >>>

On 09/22/2017 11:50 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 22 September 2017 at 11:39, Larry Martell <larry.martell at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:30 AM Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 22 September 2017 at 10:33, Larry Martell <larry.martell at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> I am

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Larry Martell <larry.martell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Pete Biggs <pete at biggs.org.uk> wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 14:16 +0100, Kai Grunau wrote: > >> On 05.12.2017 14:05, Larry Martell wrote: > >> > I am running CentOS 7 and I have python version: > >> > > >> >

Hi Martell, r289280 was not intended to be a significant functional change in the sense that it would cause programs to fail to link, so this may be a bug I introduced in r289280 (or one of the followup patches, which also changed link order). How is crt0_c.c being added to the link? If crt0_c.c is supplying a definition of the main function I would expect it to be in an archive which would

Hey guys, So I was able to modify dlltool to produce the exact same layout as lib.exe with the same section numbers etc. I've first managed to first create the correct section so that lld gives me link errors and then resolve those errors to create an exe. This is one thing that is still missing that sticks out like a sore thumb In the actual imports of the functions the objects are very

Hi Rui, Thanks for getting back to me on this Do you think that you can make dlltool to generate short import libraries? > If you can, it would be the easiest way to solve the issue. > On my current tests ld seems to not like libraries built with short import libraries so this would require an ABI break in binutils. dlltool has support for loads of legacy targets and changing this would

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:30 AM Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com> wrote: > On 22 September 2017 at 10:33, Larry Martell <larry.martell at gmail.com> > wrote: > > I am trying to get a centos 6 system on the internet with a tethered > > iPhone. I can see the phone with lsusb as bus 001 device 011. A post on > > stackoverflow said I would need to run

It's doable to support dlltool-style import libraries by LLD. .idata sections in dlltool-style libraries are designed so that they will naturally construct the import descriptor table by just sorting them by section name. Supporting them is not hard. One thing we need to do is that currently we construct the import descriptor directly from short import libraries. We don't create

Hi Martell, Sorry for the belated response. I missed this email. I took a quick look at the library file you have attached and noticed that the file consists of regular object files. LLD expects that all dllimported symbols are described using "short import library" (PE/COFF spec 7). Because I didn't test LLD with dlltool-style archive files, it's no surprise that it didn't

On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Martell Malone <martellmalone at gmail.com> wrote: > It's doable to support dlltool-style import libraries by LLD. .idata >> sections in dlltool-style libraries are designed so that they will >> naturally construct the import descriptor table by just sorting them by >> section name. Supporting them is not hard. > > > I