On Feb 8, 2012, at 6:43 AM, Satish Balay wrote: > On Tue, 7 Feb 2012, Barry Smith wrote: > >> >> On Feb 7, 2012, at 9:09 PM, Sean Farley wrote: >> >>> I'm sure Jed (or Matt in his prime) could have run over to IIT and >>> restarted the machine in less time than this :-) >>> >>> Sure, and like everybody else they would have had to wait outside until >>> they had keys :-) >> >> Those guys are very resourceful; I cannot image a simple locked door would >> be an issue for them. >> >> Barry >> >> Besides who the heck set up the machine so it cannot be started remotely? >> Should have used an Apple machine :-) > > > It was a human error [when you tell something to shutdown - it should not > automatically restart]. > > yeah - if we installed server infrastructure with remote admin feature > - then it could have been powered up remotely [from the remote > management console or something like that..]
Isn't that a basic Linux thing, start on LANS signal. > > looks like folks [Sean,Matt,Barry] are happy with bitbucket. Not me. I'm not happy with it. I prefer the PETSc machine, bitbucket is just a back up when the PETSc machine goes down. If the PETSc machine is back up then we switch the master repository back. Barry > > Sean - you'll have to transfer all repos and keys to the new site. > > For now - I've removed petsc-dev and BuildSystem from petsc.cs.iit - > and will plan a phased shutdown of the machine - as soon as you can > find new home for all repos. > > Satish
