Thanks for the responses everyone. I have some reading to do. ;)
Eric
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for the responses everyone. I have some reading to do. ;)
Eric
All,
I am having a weird problem and I don't know if it's my config or
something about the 2.6 kernel. In a machine with two integrated NICs
(Penguin Relion 125), the 2.6 kernel reverses the assignment order of
the physical interfaces to eth0 eth1. Such that my
/etc/network/interfaces configs
On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 14:55, Franz Georg Köhler wrote:
This occasionally happens with new kernel releases.
I'd like to know why.
Swap your configuration...
Again, I'd like to know *why* it happens rather than blindly changing
configs. What if I had 3 interfaces, what would happen then? I
All,
I am having a weird problem and I don't know if it's my config or
something about the 2.6 kernel. In a machine with two integrated NICs
(Penguin Relion 125), the 2.6 kernel reverses the assignment order of
the physical interfaces to eth0 eth1. Such that my
/etc/network/interfaces configs
On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 14:55, Franz Georg Köhler wrote:
This occasionally happens with new kernel releases.
I'd like to know why.
Swap your configuration...
Again, I'd like to know *why* it happens rather than blindly changing
configs. What if I had 3 interfaces, what would happen then? I
to these controllers appear as /dev/cciss/cXdXpX
c=controller #
d=logical drive #
p=partition #
Thus the first partition on the first logical drive on the built-in
controller is /dev/cciss/c0d0p1.
Cheers,
Eric
--
Eric Sproul
nTelos OSS Engineering
--
Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard
to these controllers appear as /dev/cciss/cXdXpX
c=controller #
d=logical drive #
p=partition #
Thus the first partition on the first logical drive on the built-in
controller is /dev/cciss/c0d0p1.
Cheers,
Eric
--
Eric Sproul
nTelos OSS Engineering
--
Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard
Hi,
Does anyone know if the new Sendmail bug:
http://www.sendmail.org/8.12.10.html
affects 8.11.x? I have a few non-Debian boxes still running 8.11.7 (the
3/31 patch didn't bump the version number), and I haven't been able to
find any specific info.
Thanks,
Eric
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sat, 2003-09-06 at 22:34, Russell Coker wrote:
On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 00:08, Eric Sproul wrote:
until the entire message has been received and processed, the receiving
MTA is not responsible for the message. In fact, I think this is
RFC-specified. Why then, if the receiver isn't
On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 01:14, Russell Coker wrote:
I was under the impression that Sendmail also queues everything to disk. How
does it's queue operate then?
While the message is coming in, Sendmail buffers the message to memory,
optionally piping the DATA portion to a socket (for milter
On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 10:18, Tinus Nijmeijers wrote:
On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 16:08, Eric Sproul wrote:
Yes, I know we could set a larger minimum interval for POP, but the
political implications of generating tech support calls about why can't
I POP my mail? prevent it. Don't get me started
On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 11:19, Tinus Nijmeijers wrote:
cyrus huh? in that case: is cyrus-popd a drop-in replacement for UW-pop
(ipopd) on debian?
I seem to remember it is not.
You are correct. Cyrus uses a completely different method for storing
mail, so you cannot just install its POP daemon.
On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 01:43, Rudi Starcevic wrote:
Hi,
Sorry to bother you all with this repeat question.
I've have searched around and seen plenty of opinions but I'd like to
ask again and get the latest from this list.
Sendmail or Qmail ? That is my question.
Rudi,
I work at an ISP
14 matches
Mail list logo
