similar to: Dovecot API for Email Archive

Guys, I'm running Samba 2.0.7 on a Solaris 7 box and in the log.nmb I'm getting this error when trying to get a machine to join the domain. There is a quad ethernet adapter in the client machine, however I'm not using it. Can someone explain the below error or tell me why it's showing up? Thanks, PhilY tail -f log.nmb [2001/01/02 11:50:20, 1]

Dear Daniele, thanks a lot for your support, i have some things that are not so clear for me: - I can send you the whole sources for our UPSs, do you need only Headers and C files or also other files (i suppose Driver list)? - Seen that we had some problems with the Blazer driver (the battery voltage calculation were not correct for our UPSs) we copied it and modified a bit while changing the

This version adds a feature to expose the touch count for touch devices through the X device. It makes it possible for clients to adjust their UI based on the number of supported touches by this device. Also, the draglock code had a bug and would call memset with an invalid size, causing memory corruption. You're advised to update, especially if you expect someone to use the draglock options.

Attempt a clean installation of your OS preference.Other than that, my guess is that your machine is dying, and no amount of money would fix the components.Computers are really quite inexpensive these days, so I would recommend that you consider that choice first.Best of luck.../rgc On Tuesday, July 10, 2018 9:50 PM, "admin at siegel-tech.net" <admin at siegel-tech.net>

On 07/11/2018 01:39 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 07/11/2018 09:20 AM, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: >> On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 06:34 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> I pushed the 3 SRPMs that are not in CR to: >>> >>> http://vault.centos.org/6.10/os/Source/SPackages/ >> >>> All the other new SRPMS should be available from : >>> >>>

follow up question. Is there a commit which is reasonable to backport for me into the packages or is it too intrusive or based on heavily changed code? Thanks, Wolfgang On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Wolfgang Rosenauer <wrosenauer at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote: > >> On 11 Jul 2018, at 8.41, Wolfgang

On 07/09/2018 09:38 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 07/06/2018 10:30 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> On 07/05/2018 02:27 PM, Phil Wyett wrote: >>> On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 06:16 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>> On 07/03/2018 09:04 AM, Sean wrote: >>>>> >>> >>> >>> <snip> >>> >>>> OK guys .. Firefox 60 is

On 07/11/2018 08:28 AM, Phil Wyett wrote: > On Wed, 2018-07-11 at 06:31 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> On 07/09/2018 09:38 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> On 07/06/2018 10:30 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>> On 07/05/2018 02:27 PM, Phil Wyett wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 06:16 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>>>> On 07/03/2018 09:04 AM,

On 07/11/2018 09:20 AM, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 06:34 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> I pushed the 3 SRPMs that are not in CR to: >> >> http://vault.centos.org/6.10/os/Source/SPackages/ > >> All the other new SRPMS should be available from : >> >> http://vault.centos.org/6.9/cr/Source/SPackages/ > > When you have time,

What should a well behaved back end do with a load or store with alignment less than the natural alignment of the type? I believe C++ considers such access to be UB. I'm not sure what the IR semantics are. I think my options are: - Delete the operation / use undef - Lower as if it is naturally aligned - Lower via inefficient code that assumes align 1 Thanks, Jon -------------- next part

Hi, Some Mitel products, which are CentOS 6.x or 7.x servers based with some telephony services added, are only supported on VMware virtualisation platform, even all if theses CentOS guests are certified on last CentOS/Redhat Virtualization or Microsoft Hyper V platforms. So, at he moment we have three bad choises : - Migrate part of our virtualization services from KVM/libvirt to VMware ; -

Hi, I'm running 2.2.36 (as provided by openSUSE in their server:mail repository) and at least at one of my systems LMTP is crashing regularly on certain messages (apparently a lot of them). Sometimes (but not always a backtrace is posted to the logs: 2018-07-11T07:34:56.741848+02:00 saruman dovecot: lmtp(14690): Fatal: master: service(lmtp): child 14690 killed with signal 11 (core dumps

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote: > On 11 Jul 2018, at 8.41, Wolfgang Rosenauer <wrosenauer at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I'm running 2.2.36 (as provided by openSUSE in their server:mail > repository) and at least at one of my systems LMTP is crashing regularly on > certain messages (apparently a lot of them). > > >

FYI to all: I've updated the design document to include the newly disclosed variants 1.1 and 1.2 (collectively called Bounds Check Bypass Store or BCBS). There is no change to the proposed implementation which can already robustly mitigate these variants. I've also updated my patch as we have very significant interest in getting at least an early "beta" version of this into the

On 07/11/2018 01:36 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 07/11/2018 08:28 AM, Phil Wyett wrote: >> On Wed, 2018-07-11 at 06:31 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> On 07/09/2018 09:38 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>> On 07/06/2018 10:30 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>>> On 07/05/2018 02:27 PM, Phil Wyett wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 06:16 -0500,

Thanks, Richard. Based on the feedback from this thread, I'll move forward with the patches for nofree, nosync, adding a new corresponding dereferenceable attribute (my suggestion is to name this dereferenceable_on_entry; suggestions welcome), and updating Clang is emit this new attribute instead of the current one.  -Hal On 07/11/2018 06:43 PM, Richard Smith wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jul 2018

Hello llvm-dev! We are currently building a tool using LLVM which statically computes the worst-case stack depth for programs whose call-graphs are statically constrained. While this task is undecidable for general programs, we specifically plan to use it to analyze all entry points into Zircon’s kernel and the vDSO. Currently, without such a tool, the best option for allocating kernel memory in