On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Guus Snijders gsnijd...@gmail.com wrote:
Op 7 dec. 2012 23:46 schreef Δημήτρης Ζέρβας 01tto...@gmail.com het
volgende:
I think that linking won't solve my problem as I include
/data/workbench/mnt/lib in my $LD_LIBRARY_PATH...
In that case; isn't it
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 09:08:28PM +0100, Karol Babioch wrote:
Hi,
I've installed Arch on a system with a two disk setup, where the first
disk is a SSD, which I'm booting from. The second disk is an encrypted
software RAID with LVM on top.
Now obviously I want the second disk to be
Hi,
Am 08.12.2012 21:21, schrieb Dave Reisner:
In core/lvm2 there's an lvm-on-crypt.service which you can enable. In
testing/lvm2, you only need lvm-monitoring.service.
Thanks for your reply. Although probably both of these service files
would require the device to the unlocked. Currently its
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 09:52:34PM +0100, Karol Babioch wrote:
Hi,
Am 08.12.2012 21:21, schrieb Dave Reisner:
In core/lvm2 there's an lvm-on-crypt.service which you can enable. In
testing/lvm2, you only need lvm-monitoring.service.
Thanks for your reply. Although probably both of these
On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 12:41:56 -0600
Leonid Isaev lis...@umail.iu.edu wrote:
Is this behavior normal or a bug?
I think it is normal.
This discussion may shed some light on the bad reasoning likely behind
what you are experiencing as ipv6 overscoped on the back of one
necessity.
Hi,
Am 08.12.2012 22:06, schrieb Dave Reisner:
Without posting it, I have no idea.
Basically it looks like this:
raid /dev/sdb1xxx
In this setup /dev/sdb1 is a encrypted block device. Its not the one
mentioned in the beginning, but the situation is quite similar. xxx is
the
On Dec 8, 2012 8:12 PM, Karol Babioch ka...@babioch.de wrote:
Hi,
Am 08.12.2012 22:06, schrieb Dave Reisner:
Without posting it, I have no idea.
Basically it looks like this:
raid /dev/sdb1xxx
In this setup /dev/sdb1 is a encrypted block device. Its not the one
On 12/08/12 at 09:48pm, G. Schlisio wrote:
Am 07.12.2012 01:49, schrieb Calvin Morrison:
On 6 December 2012 17:05, G. Schlisio g.schli...@dukun.de wrote:
Am 06.12.2012 21:07, schrieb Jonathan Steel:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:59:27AM +0100, G. Schlisio wrote:
after updating my laptop
Hello list,
from a reply I got to a bug report (FS#32817, reply is private) I found
out that configuration files in /etc/conf.d are deprecated and that the
supported way is to replicate and customize service files.
Imagine that in /usr unit file the daemon is being called as binary -d.
So I
On 12/09/12 at 04:01am, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
Hello list,
from a reply I got to a bug report (FS#32817, reply is private) I
found out that configuration files in /etc/conf.d are deprecated and
that the supported way is to replicate and customize service files.
Imagine that in /usr
10 matches
Mail list logo
