On Jun 14, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Danny MacMillan wrote:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 10:39:10PM -0600, Danny MacMillan wrote:
Hello,
Every time I read an email that has a line in the message body that
starts with the word From, the line is quoted with a character.
It is my understanding that this
On Jun 14, 2005, at 3:15 PM, Danny MacMillan wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:28:45PM -0400, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Jun 14, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Danny MacMillan wrote:
It turns out that when I send the same email both to freebsd-test@
and directly to the account I have subscribed
On Jun 13, 2005, at 1:12 PM, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 6/13/05, Andreas Davour [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 6/7/05, Nosehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello FreeBSD :D
A question and I'm out: I have an old pc, running on a 300 MHz
Intel Celeron
On Jun 9, 2005, at 7:36 AM, dk dkrules wrote:
I am very dissappointed. I have been looking on the net for 3 days now
looking for easy setup guides or How to guides and setting up FreeBSD
5.x with transparent proxy and firewall and there simply is no easy
way explaining to beginners how to do
On Jun 9, 2005, at 8:39 AM, Lane wrote:
As you can see, comparison with MS is not likely to get you any
constructive
input :) Sorry, that's the nature of the BSD!
Ya' think?
Is it EVER effective to basically say I'm used to X, Y is different
and I'm not used to it, so Y sucks?
On Jun 1, 2005, at 5:25 PM, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Jun 1, 2005, at 3:16 PM, Jorn Argelo wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Jun 1, 2005, at 8:07 AM, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
I've been looking into ways of improving our spam filtering.
Currently I'm running
On Jun 1, 2005, at 5:35 PM, Philip Hallstrom wrote:
[description of postgrey snipped]
The main advantage of this is that spammers and viruses have massive
amount of email lists and just try to send it to as many people as
possible. They are not going to wait and try to send the e-mail
On Jun 2, 2005, at 1:14 PM, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Jun 2, 2005, at 8:49 AM, Kirk Strauser wrote:
On Thursday 02 June 2005 06:54, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
If people keep accepting broken implementation as the status quo,
we're
going to keep getting people who leave broken
I've been looking into ways of improving our spam filtering. Currently
I'm running postfix with amavisd-new (spamassassin and clamav), and saw
an article on greylisting using postgrey. Turns out there's a port for
it already in FreeBSD.
I am still googling for info, but as I understand it
On Jun 1, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
Bart Silverstrim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been looking into ways of improving our spam filtering.
Currently
I'm running postfix with amavisd-new (spamassassin and clamav), and
saw
an article on greylisting using postgrey. Turns out
On Jun 1, 2005, at 1:33 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
Bart Silverstrim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there instructions you know of for the installation to get
postgrey
to integrate with postfix from ports on FreeBSD? (Huh?)
Um...let's rephrase. Is there a reference of what needs to be done
after
On May 6, 2005, at 2:35 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
A) You sent messages to unknown hundreds or thousands of people on the
mailing list, all of which could have a cached copy of your messages,
and now wonder about privacy?
I've explained the differences before; perhaps I
On May 6, 2005, at 2:42 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Yeah, cuz, we wouldn't want the archives to be referenced for people
who are looking for help on topics, after all.
Do you think that subscribers would refuse to grant permission to have
their posts archived? If so
On May 6, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Roland Smith writes:
On the page where you subscribe to a mailing list there is a link to
the
list archives. The existance to this link implies a public accessible
archive of the list. If you don't like that, don't subscribe.
You cannot be sure
On May 6, 2005, at 2:48 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Paul Schmehl writes:
Before you start spouting legal advice on a public list, I would
suggest
that you point to chapter and verse that *specifically* addresses
posts
made to a public forum that *explicitly* states that such posts will
be
On May 6, 2005, at 2:50 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Al Johnsonn writes:
This advice is more ridiculous than telling him to put aerosol spray
back
into a can.
Where's the flaw in it? That's what the DMCA is for.
Betwen this and the claim about stopping traffic in third party non-US
sites
On May 6, 2005, at 3:53 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I doubt seriously your *extremely* strict interpretation of copyright
would hold up in any court of law in the US or anywhere else for that
matter. I have no doubt that you could find a judge somewhere to rule
in your favor. After all, judges
On May 6, 2005, at 8:14 PM, Chris wrote:
Hahaha - good stuff! Yanno, last I knew (and that was some time ago)
You
had to submit writings for review to the copyright folks here in the
U.S.
Then, if they deem it so, you then had to pay a fee to have it
copyrighted. As I said - this may or may
On May 6, 2005, at 8:17 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Absolutely! Copyright doesn't protect anyone from making a fool out
of themselves.
So I see. But that is not the purpose of copyright.
Proven time and time again :-)
___
On May 7, 2005, at 7:15 AM, Alex de Kruijff wrote:
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 11:45:35AM +0200, X3K6A2 wrote:
Marc Fonvieille writes:
All, and I said All, mailing list subscribing forms mention their
archives (To see the collection of prior postings to the list,
visit
the freebsd-blahblah
On May 7, 2005, at 1:53 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Dilemma...how do I get permission to quote you to reply to you?
You can e-mail me and ask. However, backquoting of portions of a
message generally falls within the scope of fair use, IMO (IANAL).
Nope, because
On May 7, 2005, at 6:18 PM, Chris wrote:
Oh no!!!
Fear?
Uncertainty?
Doubt?
I guess OpenSource isnt the way to go. I guess FreeBSD isnt right for
me.
Oh no - Look at all this termoil...
I guess I should just buy the Microsoft product so I won't violate
anything. Surely becasue if I pay for it -
On May 7, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Joshua Tinnin writes:
Then so is every single tech help list with public archives.
Yes. The fact that certain infringing actions may take place with
great
frequency does not make them any less infringing.
Fine. Take them each to court. See
On May 7, 2005, at 10:44 PM, Chris wrote:
Aaaarrggghhg
Isn't anyhing sacred anymore?!
Oh how I long for the Dos-dayz.
Whoa is mee
...licensed too. Sorry. You don't own it.
:-p
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On May 6, 2005, at 6:57 AM, Fafa Hafiz Krantz wrote:
No, that would be impossible. Hint: third-party mirrors (i.e.
Google).
What if ones life is at risk?
Would that be up to the 3rd party mirror administrators?
A) You sent messages to unknown hundreds or thousands of people on the
mailing
On May 6, 2005, at 7:06 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas writes:
This is a recurring theme. It's really *NOT* the fault of the
postmaster of FreeBSD.org that you posted to public mailing lists.
It _is_ the fault of the mailing list manager that posts are being
archived without the
On May 6, 2005, at 7:08 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Fafa Hafiz Krantz writes:
What if ones life is at risk?
As I've said, send a DMCA to the owner of the archive (and to other
parties if they have copies). If they don't take down the infringing
material, you can sue. If their ISPs don't
On May 6, 2005, at 1:04 PM, Kirk Strauser wrote:
On Friday 06 May 2005 05:52, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
DMCA
So, how's that working out for you with non-US third-party mirrors that
aren't subject to American law in any way?
Give it time...
With what seems to be growing acceptance of censorship over
On May 4, 2005, at 2:30 AM, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2005-05-03 17:29, Benjamin Keating [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Things like that bring noise to this mailing list.
It's ok. This is part of the purpose of having the list :)
You wouldn't think so from the flak some people have received for not
On Apr 28, 2005, at 12:28 PM, Tomas Quintero wrote:
On 4/28/05, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Carpenter, Rohan S wrote:
test test test test --- test tets test test
*Sigh*
Some users just don't have a clue - do they.
Wow I'm very glad you brought this constructive piece of information
to the
On Apr 20, 2005, at 3:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
koen de wijs wrote:
Hello folks,
I'm new to unix. This year I tried FreeBSD. Some friend of
mine adviced
FreeBSD. I think it works great. Only one thing that I
don't like is
that you will need to know a lot to setup a lot of basic stuff.
Yeah,
On Apr 21, 2005, at 7:48 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bart
Silverstrim
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux
I'm afraid after playing
On Apr 20, 2005, at 3:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
koen de wijs wrote:
Hello folks,
I'm new to unix. This year I tried FreeBSD. Some friend of
mine adviced
FreeBSD. I think it works great. Only one thing that I
don't like is
that you will need to know a lot to setup a lot of basic stuff.
Yeah,
On Mar 30, 2005, at 2:00 PM, Gary Kline wrote:
Can I use dd to copy an *.exe file from ~/ to my floppy;
then have present the file to a:\ under DOG?
Don't know...don't think so easily, though. Wouldn't it be easier to
use something like mtools?
On Mar 27, 2005, at 11:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Firstly, anyone who uses their own server for lists is
a complete idiot.
Do you have an actual reason to back up this assertion?
Are you trying to insult everyone
who has found AOL or Yahoo or Gmail to be more
convenient for not clogging their
On Mar 27, 2005, at 11:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apparently you can't read. I didn't say you were an
idiot for running your own server.
Can't read what? I'm not sure what line you're specifically
referencing here, probably because you didn't inline the comment. But
that's okay...we'll
On Mar 26, 2005, at 2:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is the kind of disinformation I have been
referring to
What in particular are you referring to?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Mar 26, 2005, at 5:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, the theory is very nice; you've done a nice
job reading Intel's marketing garb.
What theory? All I see is On Mar 26, 2005, at 5:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
___
On Mar 27, 2005, at 7:01 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
Tell that to the MS developers then - perhaps they will listen to you.
Done.
What did they say?
Tell them to stop producing bloated code.
I've tried, but that is both a tendency of many developers (especially
PC developers) and a
On Mar 28, 2005, at 3:08 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris Warren writes:
I'm not an NT fan myself, but from reading your past posts, it seems
to
do everything you need far better than freebsd. Why not just stick
with
NT/2k? Just curious.
I wanted to diversify my experience.
In arguing?
On Mar 28, 2005, at 9:21 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
Yay! *claps*
Isn't that what Ted has been telling you to an extent - that it's the
HP/Compaq microcode in the drivers?
No. He and most other people have been trying to convince me that it's
defective hardware, and not a
On Mar 29, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
I disagree - If FBSD does not (or did not) know of the HP/Compaq
tweakes
in the microcode, how can you claim it's broken?
Because it works with Windows NT.
If a machine with a gig of memory runs fine under DOS but actually has
a
On Mar 29, 2005, at 11:09 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
What did they say?
MS developers are much like most other developers: it's never their
fault.
From the way you were complaining, I had the impression that MS was
bending backwards to help in issues while the FreeBSD
On Mar 29, 2005, at 11:18 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
I think, correct me if I'm wrong Ted (et al), that he's saying the
microcode in the hardware was modified, thus has a bug proprietary to
the HP implementation of that controller, and the driver/interface in
NT either
On Mar 29, 2005, at 11:23 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
If a machine with a gig of memory runs fine under DOS but actually has
a bad big of memory hardware near the 512 meg address range, it would
probably still run flawlessly for a very very long time...
This machine has
On Mar 29, 2005, at 11:25 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
Does it work on an Apple Friggin IIe?
?
Apple IIe? you've never heard of it?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To
On Mar 29, 2005, at 1:50 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chris writes:
No - NOT the PC - the hardware that's in question. The Adaptec WITH
the
modified code. I'm willing to bet, it's not.
Should I check for restrictions on chipset temperature, relative
humidity, and atmospheric pressure as well?
Are
On Mar 29, 2005, at 2:01 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
He is saying that the microcode was modified and that we speculate
that
the mods contain a bug proprietary to the HP implementation of that
controller.
What makes it a _bug_? Why would the modified firmware contain a
On Mar 29, 2005, at 4:03 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
It's deduction.
It can't be. There's nothing to deduct from.
Your description of the problem.
Tell me again what those messages said, exactly?
Can't. I didn't tell you the first time.
Really? I have a free program
On Mar 24, 2005, at 10:30 AM, Bob Johnson wrote:
Peter Risdon wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 10:05 +0100, Josh Ockert wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:51:51 +, Peter Risdon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 08:54 +0100, Josh Ockert wrote:
I've noticed that nobody responds negatively to
On Mar 24, 2005, at 12:34 PM, Peter Risdon wrote:
From: Peter Risdon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: March 24, 2005 12:31:36 PM EST
To: Bob Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Josh Ockert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: mot de passe root
On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 10:30 -0500, Bob Johnson wrote:
No, I'm sorry but
On Mar 24, 2005, at 2:34 PM, Peter Risdon wrote:
I have no idea why you're trying to misrepresent what I was saying.
It's
starting to feel mildly bizarre.
You say this as if it is the first time, being a system admin, you have
had this feeling...
___
On Mar 21, 2005, at 10:19 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Freminlins writes:
Alternatively, show us it is not a firmware problem first.
It ran for eight years without errors.
It's not throwing darts, it's sensible advice. NT is ancient, like
your firmware no doubt.
So your saying an anciety copy of
On Mar 22, 2005, at 1:14 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anthony -
I'm curious - with the issues you are having with the drives (SCSI
I think you mentioned) have you considered these ideas?
1. Upgrade the system BIOS
2. Upgrade the firmware in the SCSI controller
3.
On Mar 22, 2005, at 4:13 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
I have told him to go into his Vectra BIOS and limit the sync
negotiation
on both disk drives to the same speed - 10Mbt. He refuses to try
doing
this.
You're incorrect. I have _already_ done it, at your suggestion;
On Mar 22, 2005, at 4:25 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Freminlins writes:
On a different OS.
Exactly. With _identical_ hardware. So if the hardware ran under the
other OS, but not under this OS, where do you look first for the
problem?
Depends on the problem. Windows 98 needed more reboots than
On Mar 22, 2005, at 5:26 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Freminlins writes:
So stick with NT. Why would you change from something that runs
perfectly for 8 years?
I was able to retire the legacy applications on the machine and I
wanted
to try something new.
And you ran into a snag that you can't
On Mar 22, 2005, at 5:40 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Peter Risdon writes:
2. Does a version of FreeBSD that is contemporary with NT and your
machine (ancient, unsupported, like NT) drive this hardware OK?
I don't know. Why should I have to run an eight-year-old version of
FreeBSD?
Instead of a
On Mar 22, 2005, at 5:46 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
That is also when I discovered how Microsoft gets away with telling the
world that they will fix any problem that you call into their
$250-and-incident
tech support people. If you present them with a problem they cannot
figure out, they will
On Mar 22, 2005, at 6:39 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Peter Risdon writes:
You _are_ trying to run a version of FreeBSD equivalent to 2003/XP.
No, I'm just running FreeBSD 5.3. It has nothing to do with Windows.
This seems to be evidence that you're intentionally being obtuse.
Are you incapable
On Mar 22, 2005, at 4:21 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
There is a third option. Microsoft can simply quite releasing new
versions of it's established products and go to work creating new
products that people would want to buy.
That business model doesn't work, which is why
On Mar 22, 2005, at 10:19 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Or it gave warnings that NT didn't. Or it showed problems that NT
didn't.
Unless someone can tell me what these messages mean, they are useless
to
me, warnings or not.
If it worked so well, why not put NT back
On Mar 22, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Depends on the problem. Windows 98 needed more reboots than NT did on
the same hardware. By your comparison they should be the same in
reliability and performance, no?
No, by my comparison they should experience
On Mar 22, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
And you ran into a snag that you can't work through.
Yes, at least not with the time I have available.
Classic tune. I play it a lot too.
Most people if they were doing this on a lark would either replace the
hardware
On Mar 22, 2005, at 11:05 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Instead of a five year old version of Windows? :-)
Why should it matter?
Comprehension on this matter is a little lagging. I seem to recall you
said you went from Windows 2000 (it's what, 5 years old?) to a new
On Mar 22, 2005, at 11:50 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Obvious concern is that it is a warning that something's wrong (or not
set up correctly) and it may fail or cause problems down the road.
Who can tell me _exactly_ what it means?
I don't know...I'm not on the devel
On Mar 20, 2005, at 4:03 PM, Duo wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And yes, looking for non MS solutions, for the sake of it, is a valid
choice.
Not for many corporate managers. They don't care whether it's
Microsoft
or not, as long as it's the best tool for the
On Mar 20, 2005, at 11:10 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And now that embrace and extend has worked, Exchange, sits fairly
stagnant.
If it does the job, it doesn't have to change.
Then why new versions?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
On Mar 20, 2005, at 1:18 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Duo writes:
And you failed to answer his question. Why not stop trying to avoid
it by
answering it.
I did answer it. I asked for a product that provides ALL the features
of Exchange. And he surely knows what all of the features of Exchange
On Mar 18, 2005, at 6:23 AM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
I log in from a remote windows computer on my school using PuTTY w/
ssh2. What I'd like to know is how *safe* is the login from this
windows
machine? I mean, can my login to my FreeBSD server at home be
*monitored* by someone while I'm using
On Mar 18, 2005, at 10:12 AM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
On 18 Mar Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Mar 18, 2005, at 6:23 AM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
I log in from a remote windows computer on my school using PuTTY w/
ssh2. What I'd like to know is how *safe* is the login from this
windows machine?
I would
On Mar 14, 2005, at 12:38 AM, Martin Schweizer wrote:
Hello Bart
Am Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 01:20:14PM -0500 Bart Silverstrim schrieb:
On Mar 13, 2005, at 1:10 PM, Martin Schweizer wrote:
Hello
I've two X server: a client and a server. How I can contact from the
client
the server (I read some
On Mar 14, 2005, at 7:39 AM, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2005-03-13 16:53, Bart Silverstrim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On the contrary, there are numerous cases when local patches, specific
to the distribution of Linux that is used, are used:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-lvm/2002
On Mar 13, 2005, at 1:10 PM, Martin Schweizer wrote:
Hello
I've two X server: a client and a server. How I can contact from the
client
the server (I read some articles but did not find a solution)? I can
successfully start X applications over SSH but I can't contact the
xdm. What
do I wrong?
On Mar 12, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Chris wrote:
Aperez wrote:
Hello everybdody
I read an interview of Linus Torvald made by Linux Magazine. In that
interview Linus mentioned the following:
On the other hand, no, Linux does not have that stupid notion of
having totally separate kernel development for
On Mar 13, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Loren M. Lang wrote:
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 01:24:42PM -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Mar 12, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Chris wrote:
Aperez wrote:
Hello everybdody
I read an interview of Linus Torvald made by Linux Magazine. In that
interview Linus mentioned the following
On Mar 12, 2005, at 4:44 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 11, 2005, at 1:37 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kirk
Strauser Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:42 AM
To:
On Mar 13, 2005, at 3:46 PM, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
On Sunday 13 March 2005 12:38 pm, you wrote:
Michael C. Shultz wrote:
On Sunday 13 March 2005 12:05 pm, Fafa Diliha Romanova wrote:
If I just do:
cvsup -g -L 2 /etc/cvsupfile portmanager -u
Do I need portupgrade at all then?
Thanks.
Not for
On Mar 11, 2005, at 1:34 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
Atkielski
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 3:25 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: how to deal with spam for good?
There's no
On Mar 11, 2005, at 1:37 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kirk Strauser
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:42 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: how to deal with spam for good?
You know, I'm no longer
On Mar 10, 2005, at 10:44 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Kris Kennaway writes:
Isn't this a non-problem if you use ntpd?
Unfortunately, no, because the TCP stacks on most systems don't use the
disciplined clock provided by NTP for the timestamps. Instead they use
a clock based directly on the RTC,
On Mar 9, 2005, at 11:54 PM, Mike Hauber wrote:
On Wednesday 09 March 2005 10:53 pm, Luciano Musacchio wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering, how does this mailing list doesn't get any spam?
:), I need to set some filter on my mail server, can some one
here give me a hint on this?
thanks
heh... I'm working on
I'm trying to set up postfix to reject messages to two specific
usernames on our domains. The FreeBSD server is taking the messages,
checking them for spam and viruses, then forwarding them on to our
internal mail server.
In the /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf file, I added the line:
On Mar 9, 2005, at 10:56 AM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Wednesday, March 09, 2005 10:43:05 AM -0500 Bart Silverstrim
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I then ran the commands
postmap /usr/local/etc/postfix/access
Should be:
postmap hash:/usr/local/etc/postfix/access
man (1) postmap
I was running the command
On Mar 9, 2005, at 11:26 AM, Jim Trigg wrote:
On Wed, March 9, 2005 10:43 am, Bart Silverstrim said:
In the /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf file, I added the line:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = check_recipient_access
hash:/usr/local/etc/postfix/access
Then using tail -f /var/log/maillog, I got
On Mar 7, 2005, at 10:05 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Jerry McAllister writes:
The only real thing you can do is to read back the tape and look
for a couple of files with fairly high inode numbers for each file
system dumped.If you can read them, you can assume the tape
is readable.
I'm
On Feb 15, 2005, at 12:40 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
It's not part of the OS!
Fine. Will MS let me buy just the kernel?
No, but you don't have to buy or install most of the drivers. If you
run with only required default drivers, the system will be stable.
Let's pretend
On Feb 15, 2005, at 12:48 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
They were an outside team that worked on VMS. They started NT
before Windows became a marketing drone's dream. The Windows
subsystem
became the default subsystem after Windows 3.x took off. Originally
it
wasn't
On Feb 16, 2005, at 12:22 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Um, no. OS/2 had the Presentation Manager layer on it for the GUI.
Presentation Manager was an afterthought, once they realized how far
they had gone astray.
anthony: But IBM wanted a CLI, like DOS or
OS/2, whereas
On Feb 14, 2005, at 7:43 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Eric Kjeldergaard writes:
Well, no that's not entirely true...First off, there's the claim by
Windows itself that it's not drivers.
The OS itself never identifies problems as being within the drivers.
Driver code is assimilated with the kernel
On Feb 15, 2005, at 12:40 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Microsoft doesn't understand servers very well. Most people at
Microsoft grew up using microcomputers, and that's all they know (sound
familiar?). They truly have no idea of some of the constraints that
apply to the server world. As a
On Feb 15, 2005, at 7:56 AM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
On 15 Feb Timothy Smith wrote:
Stijn Hoop wrote:
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 02:34:24AM +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
MSIE has traditionally followed HTML standards more closely than
almost any other browser. Firefox does pretty well, tough; Opera
On Feb 13, 2005, at 4:14 PM, Ean Kingston wrote:
On February 13, 2005 03:53 am, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
You can install the X libraries and client apps on your server --
this
works fine at secure level 3 and does not require kernel
configurations
changes or
On Feb 14, 2005, at 4:01 PM, Martin Ibert wrote:
Hi,
I'm at a loss about whom to contact, since the PR slot on the contacts
page only says seat open. So I tried questions.
I've read on slashdot that you entertain the notion of running a
FreeBSD logo contest. As a long-time user of FreeBSD, both
On Feb 11, 2005, at 4:51 PM, Peter Risdon wrote:
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 15:56 -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 8:00 AM -0500 2/11/05, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
[...]
Since when did FreeBSD, a project always driven by volunteers and
not by commercial matters,
FreeBSD is a commercially viable
On Feb 12, 2005, at 7:19 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 4:11 AM
To: FreeBSD - Questions
Subject: OT: My thoughts on the list as of late...
As I read *some* (mainly because
On Feb 12, 2005, at 5:30 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Michael C. Shultz writes:
I Agree! My FreeBSD desktop is very stable and user friendly. What
ever time I spend fixing/managing desktops is on my friends windows
machines, never my own because it always just works.
Maybe you can explain to me
On Feb 12, 2005, at 4:01 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Vonleigh Simmons writes:
Rat Bastards at FreeBSD that don't break into the companies, steal the
code, and port their apps.
I don't understand this comment.
I can go months without rebooting. My NT machine has gone for
nearly a
year without a
On Feb 12, 2005, at 4:05 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
I never quite liked these arguments. The question to ask is, What
can
I use for graphics editing on platform X? What can I use for desktop
publishing on platform Y?.
Not in this case, because many
On Feb 12, 2005, at 4:20 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Bart Silverstrim writes:
Thank you for supporting vendor lock-in.
Recognizing, not supporting.
Every $ spent on a product is another $ supporting it.
Do don't even bother asking people who will suggest alternatives,
because it's not what you
101 - 200 of 328 matches
Mail list logo
