Thanks for the responses folks
Ok, I got it working as a separate bind mounts as suggested.
My fstab now includes the smb shares as follows:
/home/username/smbshare /var/chroot/sarge-ia32/home/username/smbshare none
noauto,user,bind 0 0
worked great and I now have openoffice and other chroo
On 2005-06-15 @ 08:23:44 (week 24) Mahesh T. Pai wrote:
> grub-install --recheck /dev/hda
I did that yesterday, but it came back without any error whatsoever and
the devices map was OK too. Still no go.
Grx HdV
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tro
On 2005-06-15 @ 09:57:50 (week 24) Mahesh T. Pai wrote:
> AFAICT, simply typing `rescue' at the boot prompt while booting from
> live CDs helps, even if th option does not turn up in F1 menu. In
> fact, I distinctly remember somewhere that rescue/live CDs have far
> more options than can
Hi
Some time ago I had to redo a boot record on a i386 (shouldn't be much
difference). I booted the machine from the debian install cd but stopped the
installation as soon as I got the shell working. Then I could mount the hard
disk somewhere deep into the file hierarchy (/dev/???/???/???/???
I, as I am sure many of your do, suffer from the "fam problem".
Basically it goes like this: I will be working away quite happily, I go
to open a file and fam hits 100% cpu load and never stops. This has
happened with all my Debian boxes (testing and unstable on i386 and
pure64).
On my old ma
Cameron Patrick wrote:
Yes, that would be great. It might also be possible to get PCI IDs
from within Windows XP, but I'm not sure how to go about doing that.
Hi Cameron,
I have a Windows 2003 Server with 4 RAID cards, and it is a little
easier (than say WinXP, I suppose) to get their PCI IDs
Hi Graham,
El mié, 15-06-2005 a las 11:16 +0100, Graham Smith escribió:
> I, as I am sure many of your do, suffer from the "fam problem".
> Basically it goes like this: I will be working away quite happily, I go
> to open a file and fam hits 100% cpu load and never stops. This has
> happened wi
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 03:22:27PM +0300, eternalnewbee wrote:
> I too have had similar installation problems with SATA-RAID stuff
> with SiI chipset and I was forced not to use Debian.
SiI SATA RAID is not hardware RAID. See Jeff Garzik's SATA RAID FAQ at
http://linux.yyz.us/sata/faq-sata-raid.ht
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 03:22:27PM +0300, eternalnewbee wrote:
> I have a Windows 2003 Server with 4 RAID cards, and it is a little
> easier (than say WinXP, I suppose) to get their PCI IDs under Win2K3.
>
> The first one below is 3Ware RAID card which has had its driver
> as part of Linux kernel
Erik Mouw wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 03:22:27PM +0300, eternalnewbee wrote:
I too have had similar installation problems with SATA-RAID stuff
with SiI chipset and I was forced not to use Debian.
SiI SATA RAID is not hardware RAID. See Jeff Garzik's SATA RAID FAQ at
http://linux.yyz.us/sat
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 03:22:27PM +0300, eternalnewbee wrote:
I have a Windows 2003 Server with 4 RAID cards, and it is a little
easier (than say WinXP, I suppose) to get their PCI IDs under Win2K3.
The first one below is 3Ware RAID card which has had its driver
as par
> so don't take this as a personal world
Sorry for the typo, I meant:
so please don't take this personal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
eternalnewbee wrote:
> >This one is at least supported in 2.6.10 and above, in plain SATA mode.
> >Using the proprietary software raid crap in the Sil chips isn't
> >recomended.
>
> Why not?
>
> The lowly Windows has been doing just fine with SiI; why is it not
> recommended under Linux?
Linu
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 04:15:14PM +0300, eternalnewbee wrote:
> Naturally you are not responsible for the evils in the world :-)
> so don't take this as a personal world :-) But, to have to buy
> another card just to be able to run Debian is sort of an overkill,
> isn't it?
Well I wouldn't use th
Wish I had anything constructive to add other than, "me too."
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Graham Smith wrote:
I, as I am sure many of your do, suffer from the "fam problem". Basically it
goes like this: I will be working away quite happily, I go to open a file and
fam hits 100% cpu load and never sto
In many places is written that although AMD64 port of sarge is
unofficial it has full security support of debian-security team.
I cannot find any amd64 packages on security.debian.org though.
Where can I find security updates for the AMD64 sarge?
Pavel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTEC
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 06:10:56PM +0200, Pavel Jurus wrote:
> In many places is written that although AMD64 port of sarge is
> unofficial it has full security support of debian-security team.
> I cannot find any amd64 packages on security.debian.org though.
> Where can I find security updates for
new and supported:
Gigabyte GA-K8NMF-9
nVidia nForce4-4X
K8 Socket939 / Micro ATX
4 DDR 400 Dual-Channel
8 Channel Audio
LAN
4 SATA
PCI-E*16
works well out of the box with little problems on the forcedeth ethernet
controller-module
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
Hello,
i encounter speed problems after upgrading from Realtek's 8139 to 8169.
Seems, that transfer speed dramatically drops to about 5MBit/s.
Anyone the same problem or idea to further evaluate the problem? I use the
latest 2.6.11 kernel and modules as they come along.
Greetings
Uwe
--
To UN
That means that AMD64 sarge will not get security updates? From what I
understand AMD64 should become official port (hopefully) soon - but that
would mean that only AMD64 unstable and testing will be officially part
of debian until the release of etch. Or will it mean that while AMD64
unstable and
Hi,
I try to install amd64-sid on my brand new Tyan K8E (S2865). Nforce4 chipset
wih 2Gb LAN-Adaptors, one Broadcom BMC5721 GbE, one Marvell 88E-CAA.
I went on with the "expert" option. The installation process proceed until the
network is alredy configured and the installer ask for confirm
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 06:35:58PM +0200, Uwe wrote:
> i encounter speed problems after upgrading from Realtek's 8139 to 8169.
> Seems, that transfer speed dramatically drops to about 5MBit/s.
> Anyone the same problem or idea to further evaluate the problem? I use the
> latest 2.6.11 kernel and m
Hi,
would it possible to have a version compiled for linux running on 64bits
processors like amd64 for:
http://www.highpoint-tech.com/BIOS%20+%20Driver/HRM/Linux/linux-gui-v306.tgz
http://www.highpoint-tech.com/BIOS%20+%20Driver/HRM/Linux/hptcli-v10.tgz
also it would be fine to have the source cod
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 04:15:14PM +0300, eternalnewbee wrote:
But, to have to buy another card just to be able to run Debian
>>is sort of an overkill, isn't it?
Well I wouldn't use the raid feature of that card in the first place.
> I would either buy a 3ware raid
On 2005-06-14 @ 22:05:13 (week 24) Bob Isaac wrote:
> > The system still won't recognize the harddisk as a
> > boot device.
>
> Is Grub calling your initrd during boot?
>
> i.e. is there a line similar to this:
>
> "initrd /boot/initrd.img"
>
> in your grub/menu.lst file beneath
On 2005-06-15 @ 09:57:52 (week 24) Gudjon I. Gudjonsson wrote:
> Hi
>Some time ago I had to redo a boot record on a i386 (shouldn't be much
> difference). I booted the machine from the debian install cd but stopped the
> installation as soon as I got the shell working. Then I could mount the
Hi list,
I was considering to use LVM on my brand new box now that is working. I
have never used it before, but want to learn about it. (How's that for a
reason? }:-) Before I start this little endeavor I'd like to ask if
anyone knows of any caveats of using LVM[12] on debian-amd64. Also what
are
J.A. de Vries wrote:
Hi list,
I was considering to use LVM on my brand new box now that is working. I
have never used it before, but want to learn about it. (How's that for a
reason? }:-) Before I start this little endeavor I'd like to ask if
anyone knows of any caveats of using LVM[12] on debia
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 11:51:17AM -0700, Joel Johnson wrote:
> I'd like to get others opinions on filesystems on LVM - I've been using
> XFS which lets you grow the filesystem online. What are others'
> experiences with various filesystems. Reiser and I believe ext3 are
> growable and shrinkabl
Ahh thanks for clarifying of this issue. In this case I would however
consider to be fair to mention that amd64 sarge doesn't have any
security support and not the opposite. This is quote from
http://www.debian.org/ports/amd64/ :
The unofficial stable release of the Debian AMD64 port was released
DATE15/6/2005
CALL +2348024764399
+2348035236065 RICHARD LANDER:
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
DEAR BELOVED,
IT IS MY PLEASURE TO CONTACT YOU,I A SIERRA-LEONE CITIZEN LIVING IN NIGERIA ON
POLITICAL ASYLOM,I HAVE DIAMOND STONES THAT I WANT YOU TO SELL OR COVERT IT TO
CASH URGENTLY, IF YOU ARE W
Marcin Dębicki wrote:
Leopold Palomo Avellaneda kiedys napisal:
are you running X and dchroot as the same user?
are the chroot enviroment working?
have you copied your shadow, passwd, group from 64 to 32 env?
..
Regards,
Leo
A Dimarts 14 Juny 2005 17:58, Marcin Dębicki va escriure:
I have been using LVM with debian/amd64 since I first set up the box,
including the root FS - a relatively long time now. It is quite stable, I
can tell you that much. I myself use reiserfs, which you can, along with
LVM, resize online and so forth. It's not your only filesystem choice by
any m
mirror = http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-amd64/
I hope you use the current archive, or its mirrors, from
http://amd64.debian.net .. Maybe you've been trying to get some old stuff
to work.. :-)
/n
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". T
Dne po 13. června 2005 21:15 Mickael Marchand napsal(a):
> Christian Schaefer a écrit :
> > could anyone please give me a working sources.list line to get
> > x.org-binaries for amd64?
>
> deb ftp://ftp-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/linux/debian-amd64/ ./
> works like a charm here for weeks now.
I have
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 06:47:32PM +, J.A. de Vries wrote:
> I was considering to use LVM on my brand new box now that is working. I
> have never used it before, but want to learn about it. (How's that for a
> reason? }:-) Before I start this little endeavor I'd like to ask if
> anyone knows of
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 11:51:17AM -0700, Joel Johnson wrote:
> I have had not issues using LVM with root on it. You'll save yourself
> alot of headache by putting a regular,small /boot partition at the
> beginning of the drive, then using the rest for LVM if you're so inclined.
>
> I'd like to
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 09:18:27PM +0300, eternalnewbee wrote:
> As I said earlier, SW RAID wass out of question: the box was to
> have multi-OS installation.
You ARE using software raid, just with some BIOS support and drivers for
windows. That doesn't change it from being software raid. I thin
My disk setup is:
mount -
/dev/md1 on / type ext3 (rw,errors=remount-ro)
proc on /proc type proc (rw)
sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw)
devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620)
tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw)
usbfs on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw)
/dev/md0 on /boot type ext2 (rw)
/dev/map
As I said earlier, SW RAID wass out of question: the box was to
have multi-OS installation.
You ARE using software raid, just with some BIOS support and drivers for
windows. That doesn't change it from being software raid. I think I
even read in a magazine recently how eo enable software raid
Ilya Sher wrote:
Looks like DISPLAY is set to ":0.0". In this case X client will probably
try
to connect to unix socket (which is prbably not there).
Try "export DISPLAY=127.0.0.1:0" in combination with "xhost +127.0.0.1"
This is silly when you can just bind mount /tmp and /home and get the
Uni
Graham Smith wrote:
I, as I am sure many of your do, suffer from the "fam problem".
Basically it goes like this: I will be working away quite happily, I go
to open a file and fam hits 100% cpu load and never stops. This has
happened with all my Debian boxes (testing and unstable on i386 and
pu
Now that I have both my PATA and SATA hard drives functional, I
decided to test the speeds that I am getting from both of them and
have found it surprising that my PATA is actually getting better
speeds than my SATA:
optimusprime:/home/john# hdparm -t /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing buffered disk read
43 matches
Mail list logo
