O/H Dimitris Glezos έγραψε:
> We've got an error on:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RecentChanges
>
> ValueError
>
> invalid literal for long(): not needed any more
Oops. Sorry for the double post after tchung's one.
And this triple one.
-d
--
Dimitris Glezos
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECT
We've got an error on:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RecentChanges
ValueError
invalid literal for long(): not needed any more
-d
--
Dimitris Glezos
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED], GPG: 0xA5A04C3B
http://dimitris.glezos.com/
"He who gives up functionality for ease of use
loses both and des
Hi all,
I'd be happy to help in anyway you can make use of me.
My full time job involves admining a small bevy of Linux servers (mainly
CentOS or Fedora). I have a few machines locally to test on (x86,
x86_64, and sparc). I have been involved in various aspects of the
Fedora Project, though certa
Hey. I could provide help in some of the areas mentioned...
Log management, Nagios / Cacti monitoring
xen architecture
new accounts system
ticket handling
bacula testing (needs to get into extras)
migrating fedora.rh.c off the old site and onto fedoraproject.org
[I work in these areas, or similar
Mike McGrath wrote:
At present our physical hosts use DHCP and our Xen guests do not. I'd
like to do one or the other. The only issue we have going completely
DHCP is that hosts like the proxy boxes require some aliased
interfaces[1] which isn't really a problem but it's a minor
inconvenienc
On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 16:01 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Mike McGrath wrote:
> > At present our physical hosts use DHCP and our Xen guests do not. I'd
> > like to do one or the other. The only issue we have going completely
> > DHCP is that hosts like the proxy boxes require some aliased
> > i
On Monday 12 March 2007 03:55:55 pm Mike McGrath wrote:
> At present our physical hosts use DHCP and our Xen guests do not. I'd
> like to do one or the other. The only issue we have going completely
> DHCP is that hosts like the proxy boxes require some aliased
> interfaces[1] which isn't really
Mike McGrath wrote:
At present our physical hosts use DHCP and our Xen guests do not. I'd
like to do one or the other. The only issue we have going completely
DHCP is that hosts like the proxy boxes require some aliased
interfaces[1] which isn't really a problem but it's a minor
inconvenienc
At present our physical hosts use DHCP and our Xen guests do not. I'd
like to do one or the other. The only issue we have going completely
DHCP is that hosts like the proxy boxes require some aliased
interfaces[1] which isn't really a problem but it's a minor
inconvenience if someone is looki
seth vidal wrote:
I wouldn't really call svn an upgrade. It's more like a
lateral-transition of bugs to other bugs. Let's just stay where we are
w/cvs for this rather than make extra work translating over to svn for
little apparent gain.
I ended up creating a CVS repo just so we can keep commo
Warren Togami wrote:
Anybody have any idea what this is?
Warren
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/BuildSystemClientSetup
-Mike
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/li
On 3/11/07 10:04 PM, "Jeffrey C. Ollie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake:
> On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 20:36 -0700, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 11, 2007, at 8:19 PM, Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote:
>>
>>> One thing that has really bothered me lately about SVN is the lack of
>>> merge tracking.
>>
>> It's c
Anybody have any idea what this is?
Warren
Original Message
Subject: Re: fedora-server-ca.cert missing?
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 14:07:51 -0400
From: Nuno Santos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Warren Togami <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nuno Santos wrote:
Hi Warr
Oliver Falk schrieb:
> Am 2007-03-11 12:21, Thorsten Leemhuis schrieb:
>
> I think this is something that should be discussed on the next board
> meeting; Shouldn't it? Someone from board on this list?
I think working out details like this is more for FESCo (the whole
secondary arch stuff is IMH
RFR updated
On 3/12/07, Paulo Santos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mike,
I'll sponsor it. In the meanwhile i'll try contacting him to know his
specific needs around the Xen guest.
Paulo
On 3/12/07, Mike McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyone interested in sponsoring this?
>
> http
Mike,
I'll sponsor it. In the meanwhile i'll try contacting him to know his
specific needs around the Xen guest.
Paulo
On 3/12/07, Mike McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyone interested in sponsoring this?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/RFR/SELinux
-Mike
___
Anyone interested in sponsoring this?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/RFR/SELinux
-Mike
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-
Am 2007-03-11 12:21, Thorsten Leemhuis schrieb:
Toshio Kuratomi schrieb:
On Sat, 2007-03-10 at 16:47 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Oliver Falk schrieb:
Thorsten Leemhuis schrieb:
Users of i386 and x86_64 that update daily would have had two package
updates without any benefit for them :-( I
18 matches
Mail list logo
