Re: [Cooker] About ADSL Support (?)
On Fri, 01 Dec 2000, Meir Faraj wrote: Hi , I'm living in israel and wanna pass also to ADSL technology but. problems : I've already friends that already use it (in test) and I've told them how to configure it but no one of the two have succeded . They've phone to bezek (israelies phones' service provider) and they told them that they won't support Linux for now and I've told with a technician of bezek that told me that they put to different non standart ADSL one in telaviv and others and one in Jerusalem(where I'm living) . I'm sure than it no complicate to get it works ... I will tell you what I know about the Jerusalem version (the telaviv one works like us one I think (but not sure)) Informations : The modem is an external one developed by an Israelian company Orckit . It is connected to a networks card . You conect throws the networks card to the adsl modem . Right, external ethernet ADSL modem... Have you taken a look at a Windows machine using this service?? How it works : You must create a VPN and tell via the networks card to dialup and connect to the provider Sounds like PPPoE? James.
Re: [Cooker] ext3
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000, Alexander Skwar wrote: So sprach xaos am Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 02:36:13PM -0500: On Saturday 18 November 2000 07:56, some strange person did etch this in Sorry, but why do Drive Image and Ghost need support for a particular fs? because they're dos-based programs. Well, yeah, but still: What do they need support for? If they can read the disk, *DISK* (I'm not talking about the *FS* here) why should they need support for a fs? As long as they can read the disk, they can do all they need, even compression. No; they do not do a simple partition copy. Instead, they copy the FILES in the partition. They also make appropriate SID changes for NTFS, and defragment (IIRC). That's how you can copy a 2Gb NTFS partition from one machine into a 5Gb partition on another directly. A simple byte-by-byte copy wouldn't do that. James.
Re: [Cooker] ext3
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000, Alexander Skwar wrote: So sprach James A. Sutherland am Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 09:38:54PM +: No; they do not do a simple partition copy. Instead, they copy the FILES in the partition. They also make appropriate SID changes for NTFS, and defragment (IIRC). Okay, if they do that, than they need support for an fs. But I would very much wonder if they ever support reiserfs, as it is really tied to the linux kernel. But time will prove me wrong, I hope. The same could be said of ext2, but it was supported by Partition Magic etc... James.
Re: [Cooker] Call for boycott
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, Brian J. Murrell wrote: from the quill of Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] on scroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or have a look at Kodak's digital cameras. I have written software for the DC210. They at least (or did at least) publish the interface specs to their cameras. That is better than some. Actually I might argue that publishing specs is better than binary only drivers, so Kodak could be considered better than Nvidia. Yup - after all, the specs can be "converted" into with-source drivers. Also, it allows non-Linux platforms (*BSD etc) to have drivers much more easily. James.
Re: [Cooker] We want ext3 in cooker...
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Jason Straight wrote: reiser choked on my 200gb raid 0 3 times in 2 days, If that was software RAID, that's a known problem: ReiserFS and software RAID both change part of the kernel, and they don't play nicely together yet. switched to ext2 and it's 100% stable now, Of course. ext2 isn't journalled, so it doesn't trigger the known problems with the current RAID code. also reiser seems to not support quota Quota support needs an extra patch, available from the WWW site. nor file attributes with chattr. Of course not. File attributes are ext2, so ReiserFS isn't supposed to support them. You'll find them missing from NFS, coda and devfs too :) James.
Re: [Cooker] We want ext3 in cooker...
On Sun, 05 Nov 2000, Alexander Skwar wrote: So sprach Meir Faraj am Sun, Nov 05, 2000 at 11:02:04PM +0200: please ;-) I don't wanna sound rude, but Pixel (?) once said, that it is too troublesome for him to maintain yet another set of kernels (which at least I can very well understand). So, if you really want ext3, write a kernel spec file that features ext3. Maybe this will make him change his mind. Nobody is asking for another kernel, just the inclusion of a feature in the current one. In fact, "another" kernel is the LAST thing needed. I don't want to see new features being mutually exclusive, I want one kernel with the features in! James.
