On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 11:47, Clif Jones wrote:
> It was actually a good question. When I learned Unix internals, the
> shared libs and executables
> where "busy" when loaded because of swap-in/swap-out requirements. Swap
> space was
> used to store the core memory for the apps, and the app itse
It was actually a good question. When I learned Unix internals, the
shared libs and executables
where "busy" when loaded because of swap-in/swap-out requirements. Swap
space was
used to store the core memory for the apps, and the app itself was
memory mapped when
needed. That is why you could
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 04:51:30PM -0600, Steven Critchfield wrote:
>
> This isn't intended as a flame bait. The original message should have
> been more clear that I thought you where experiencing crap in windows.
Heh. I haven't used windows since 1995 :)
In fact, with HP-UX you cannot delete o
On Sun, 2004-02-01 at 16:38, William Waites wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 04:21:23PM -0600, Steven Critchfield wrote:
> >
> > Dude maybe you need to learn more Unix programing and leave those toy
> > OSes alone. Once a module is loaded, there should be no need to read the
> > version on the fil
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 04:21:23PM -0600, Steven Critchfield wrote:
>
> Dude maybe you need to learn more Unix programing and leave those toy
> OSes alone. Once a module is loaded, there should be no need to read the
> version on the file system again. Your problem would be loading new
> modules i
On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 20:02, William Waites wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 07:43:46PM -0600, Brian West wrote:
> > Nope I do make install all the time with asterisk running without ONE
> > problem.
>
> As I said, this behaviour is specific to some implementations
> of dynamic loadable modules. I
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 07:43:46PM -0600, Brian West wrote:
> Nope I do make install all the time with asterisk running without ONE
> problem.
As I said, this behaviour is specific to some implementations
of dynamic loadable modules. It depends what OS (and in some
cases what version of the OS) yo
Nope I do make install all the time with asterisk running without ONE
problem.
bkw
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, William Waites wrote:
> While your problem is most likely bad RAM as other
> replies have suggested, there is another thing to
> keep in mind.
>
> Some implementations of dynamic module loadin
While your problem is most likely bad RAM as other
replies have suggested, there is another thing to
keep in mind.
Some implementations of dynamic module loading have
problems if a loaded module is overwritten on the
disk. What this means is that it is safest to stop
Asterisk just before running
On Friday 30 January 2004 17:57, Greg Boehnlein wrote:
> Speaking of Binary packages, has anyone had the chance to test the
> Asterisk 0.7.1 RPMS that I built last weekend?
I'm using them on an up-to-date Fedora Core 1. So far so good. I don't have
my Digium hardware yet, so I'm still just usin
On 30 Jan 2004, Joe Phillips wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 14:26, David Gomillion wrote:
> > Rob Fugina wrote:
> >
> > > Seg faulting compiles usually indicate a memory problem on the
> > > machine. Not lack of size, but bad memory, badly seated memory,
> > > etc... There's no reason asterisk ru
> Yes, Nortel Meridian's can get 5 9's easily. They are very expensive,
> but we have one running at a government site in Indiana that has been up
> for 15 years without interruption. When you upgrade the 1 control unit,
> the other 1 is servicing all the requests. There is a brief period of
> t
> Anyway, thanks for bringing my bad math to my attention. So, here's the
> question: has anyone worked on a phone system that DID have 5 9's? I'm
> not talking about core services that AT&T Long Lines owns, I mean
> customer-premises equipment. Is that an unrealistic goal?
I've never seen a ph
Yes, Nortel Meridian's can get 5 9's easily. They are very expensive, but we have one running at a government site in Indiana that has been up for 15 years without interruption. When you upgrade the 1 control unit, the other 1 is servicing all the requests. There is a brief period of time whe
> This is a reason I argue for binary packages in production
> environments. You can build the packages (eg. debs or RPMs) on a
> development machine at your leisure and install the binary in minutes on
> the production machine. If your packages use proper dependencies you
> can also be much more
Steven Critchfield wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 13:26, David Gomillion wrote:
>> Rob Fugina wrote:
>> [snip]
Is there a way to safely compile while * is running, so that I can
minimize down time of the server?
>>>
>>> Seg faulting compiles usually indicate a memory problem on the
>>> ma
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 13:26, David Gomillion wrote:
> Rob Fugina wrote:
> [snip]
> >> Is there a way to safely compile while * is running, so that I can
> >> minimize down time of the server?
> >
> > Seg faulting compiles usually indicate a memory problem on the
> > machine. Not lack of size, but b
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 14:26, David Gomillion wrote:
> Rob Fugina wrote:
>
> > Seg faulting compiles usually indicate a memory problem on the
> > machine. Not lack of size, but bad memory, badly seated memory,
> > etc... There's no reason asterisk running, or the drivers being
> > loaded, should
>
Rob Fugina wrote:
[snip]
>> Is there a way to safely compile while * is running, so that I can
>> minimize down time of the server?
>
> Seg faulting compiles usually indicate a memory problem on the
> machine. Not lack of size, but bad memory, badly seated memory,
> etc... There's no reason asteri
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 12:21:49PM -0500, Stephen R. Besch wrote:
> I just fetched today's cvs (1/30/04 11:10:31). Compiles/installs on my
> test machine (ASUS A7V, 900 MHZ). However, If I try to compile on my
> production machine (Elite K7S5A, 2.4GHz, 512MB) while * is running the
> zaptel and
I just fetched today's cvs (1/30/04 11:10:31). Compiles/installs on my
test machine (ASUS A7V, 900 MHZ). However, If I try to compile on my
production machine (Elite K7S5A, 2.4GHz, 512MB) while * is running the
zaptel and asterisk compiles seg fault. I am assuming that they will
compile correc
21 matches
Mail list logo
