Hello,
I just did:
dpkg --force-depends --purge apache php3
apt-get install apache php3
on my E250 server. After this I expected my php3 to run after uncommenting
all php related stuff in /etc/apache/*.conf but I failed even on the php3
examples.
I consider PHP3 broken because it d
On Thu, 30 May 2002, Paul Hedderly wrote:
> > Got the 2.4.19-pre8-ac5 patch, and tried to apply it on a standard
> > 2.4.18 kernel tree. I got A LOT of rejects!
> >
> > Alan's patches don't seem to be up to the usual standard...
>
> You DID apply 2.4.19-pre8 FIRST didn't you...
At least I did the
Hello,
while I know that there are some issues which let a Sparc (E250) crash
randomly if using ext3 with kernel 2.4.17 (I'm using
~> uname -a
Linux bse 2.4.17 #1 SMP Don Feb 28 12:32:06 CET 2002 sparc64
which I compiled by myself) I wonder if I should take the 2.4.18
Debian sources or 2.4
Hello,
once I had hardware failures on my E250 server which I was able to
reproduce also under Solaris. This enabled me to bother the Sun
support. Now I am in trouble because the problem only occures under
Linux :-(.
After the crash I had to switch on the machine manually. A can't to
anything
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> I guess I'm just confused. Say again why anyone is waiting for a
> Sun version of Linux for SPARC? Debian and others work pretty
> well.
But it would really help if the support would not say:
"Oh, you are running Linux on your Sparc machine. This i
Hello,
after some crashes with 2.4.16 I brought my Sparc E250 server into an
unbootable state :-(((.
Because of the crashes I observed I just swithed to ext3fs and did
so for the root partition as well. Now the box crashes while booting.
Tha last claim is that it can't fix an ro-mounted disk.
My
Hello,
I just made a dd-copy of a disk and wanted to boot from the copy.
I used the following /etc/silo.conf:
partition=1
root=/dev/sda1
timeout=100
read-only
image=1/vmlinuz
label=linux
image=1/vmlinuz.old
label=linux.old
image=2/vmlinuz
label=linuxb
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Ben Collins wrote:
> > gcc -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe
> > -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -Wall -I/usr/src/linux/include -DMODULE
> > -D__KERNEL__ -DLINUX -DEXPORT_SYMTAB -c cache.c -o cache.o
>
> Ftpfs is using the userspace compiler when it shouldn
Hello,
I tried to build the ftpfs module with kernel-source-2.4.17.
The kernel package builded fine, but
fakeroot make-kpkg modules_image
failed (log attached to this mail). Did anybody had success with this
funny thing? It's great if you use Zope.
Kind regards
Andreas.
test -f
On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> Sounds like maybe something is wrong with the preceding lines. How
> about deleting all the comment lines before hand. Or adding one.
> Mine looks like this:
>
> benedict:/usr/share/kernel-package# cat /etc/exports
> # /etc/exports: the access control li
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> Excellent, so you have a work around ~:^) Seriously, the kernel
> version will only give you better performance (depending on what the
> processor is), and who really needs that?
Performance and security. Well NFS is insecure anyway and I'm sitting
behin
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> What happens when you try the user level nfs server?
The nfs-user-server always worked like a charm and does now as well.
But I really thought it would be depreciated and wanted to try
nfs-kernel-server over and over again.
Kind regards
Andreas.
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Guillaume Lécroart wrote:
> strace seems to reveal that the error is reported by the kernel part of the
> stuff...
This was my impression that something went really wrong inside the
kernel. UNfortunately I have neither time nor enough knowledge to
track down the problem into t
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Guillaume Lécroart wrote:
> Did you try to run mountd/nfsd w/ strace and/or debug flags?
# strace /usr/sbin/exportfs -r 2>&1 | tee > exportfs.strace
wr-linux02.rki.ivbb.bund.de:/: Invalid argument
... may be somebody would have a clue from that output. I for myself
can't see
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Hakan Kuecuekyilmaz wrote:
> hmm, try it without LVM support. Seems that it still does not work for sparc
> My custom 2.4.16-pre1 did not compile with LVM support either.
This worked so far even if I wanted to try LVM :-(.
So I have to wait again for a kernel which fits my nee
Hello,
I just wanted to give the recent kernel a try after beeing bothered now to
much by the broken NFS and NCPFS of my current 2.4.9. So I installed
kernel-source-2.4.16 package from Woody and builded the usual way. But ...
sparc64-linux-gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.16/include
On Fri, 12 Oct 2001, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> I saw a note on this in Chip Salzenberg's changelog for nfs-common. It
> looks as if you'll need to update the tcpwrappers service name:
>
> * Warn users about "rpc.mountd" -> "mountd" in /etc/hosts.{allow,deny}.
I just grepped the changelogs from nef
On Fri, 12 Oct 2001, Graham Williams wrote:
> Starting NFS kernel daemon: nfsdnfssvc: Invalid argument
> mountd.
>
> Until now NFS has been working just fine. I'm running kernel 2.2.19.
> (NFS is now not working - remote hosts can not access this host.)
>
> Any ideas?
No ideas but you are not al
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Sparc/Solaris: 45s
> > Sparc/Linux:35s !! (We are really good, aren´t we?)
> > PC/Linux: 61s
>
> Gratulations
Thanks :).
> time cat smalltebledefinition | psql database -> real0m0.306s
> time psql -e database < smalltabledefinition
Hello,
people might remember my question about the E250 server with slower
disk access than a usual PC which I testet by some dd copying. Now
I found a solution:
$ dd if=hd-test.filenof=hd-test.file.out bs=1024k
Seems that there were not an opti
Quoting my previous mail and adding the rest of my homework:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Tille, Andreas wrote:
> > That's your homework for today. Tomorrow we'll get to advanced disk
> > performance considerations. ~:^)
> Sorry for beeing late in solving my homework but I l
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> Several things. One, you left out a ton of information, as this
> could be the result of many, many things. Where to start?
>
> What kind of disk/controller for each machine/disk?
Hmm, I quote from my previous mail:
> > E250:
> > ...
> > 4x36 GB SCSI
On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Andrew Sharp wrote:
> My point exactly: not only is tmpfs a notoriously slow filesystem to
Sorry what´s the difference between /tmp directory on / which has
the "default" filesystem I created while installing Solaris 8.
I really can´t understand why /tmp should be slow
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> It would be worth upgrading the ultra to a recent 2.4 kernel from
> http://vger.samba.org. I found a > 10% improvement in some IO benchmarks
Are there any patches applied? I just think about using
kernel-image-2.4.7 (or higher) from the Debian mirror.
Hello,
I´ve got a Sparc E250 server and I´m runing Debian GNU/Linux on it.
I now started to make some performance comparisons against a default PC.
Here are the configurations I used:
E250:
~> cat /proc/cpuinfo
cpu : TI UltraSparc II (BlackBird)
fpu : UltraSparc II
25 matches
Mail list logo
