Hi,
If i login as an ordinary user(admin), and try to switch to ROOT user, iam
getting Segmentating fault, though iam member of wheel group and given trust
in /etc/pam.d/su
%PAM-1.0 ### /etc/pam.d/su -->
auth required /lib/security/pam_wheel.so group=wheel
# /etc/group --
Hello Jim and others,
wouldn't it be better to implement the full backslashed sequences inside
print_esc() than only `\n'?
CU Tom.
(Thomas M.Ott)
Germany
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-co
Ahamed.MLA wrote:
> If i login as an ordinary user(admin), and try to switch to ROOT
> user, iam getting Segmentating fault, though iam member of wheel
> group and given trust in /etc/pam.d/su
A segmentation fault indicates access to memory that is out of bounds.
Requiring being in the wheel
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 10:49:07AM -0500, Phillip Susi wrote:
> I don't see why the filesystem's cluster size should have a thing to do
> with the buffer size used to copy files. For optimal performance, the
> larger the buffer, the better. Diminishing returns applies of course,
> so at some p
Hi,
Sort seems to ignore (incorrectly handle) the character '.' in the
strings. The following output is what I get with:
$ sort --version
sort (coreutils) 4.5.3
Written by Mike Haertel and Paul Eggert.
Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Michael J. Dinneen wrote:
Sort seems to ignore (incorrectly handle) the character '.' in the
strings.
Please see this FAQ entry, "Sort does not sort in normal order!":
http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/faq/coreutils-faq.html#Sort-does-not-sort-in-normal-order_0021
Ch
>
> Hi,
>
> Sort seems to ignore (incorrectly handle) the character '.' in the
> strings. The following output is what I get with:
>
> $ sort --version
> sort (coreutils) 4.5.3
> Written by Mike Haertel and Paul Eggert.
This version is quite old. The current stable version is 5.93, see
the a
What would such network filesystems report as their blocksize? I have a
feeling it isn't going to be on the order of a MB. At least for local
filesystems, the ideal transfer block size is going to be quite a bit
larger than the filesystem block size ( if the filesystem is even block
oriented.
