I'm running Outlook 2000 Threaded view, and it certainly
seems to do threading by subject
Maybe it's just trying to piss me off.
/me damns everything.
-
Tyler "[TASF]Overkill" Schwend
"Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors."
---
Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged:
Co
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 09:14:05PM -0500, Me wrote:
> I forgot to mention that I have no mods running. I'm runnin NS. I don't
> know if that uses more CPU than CS or TFC.
Click!
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 02:36:29PM -0800, m0gely wrote:
> >> >>the 44% utilization. I was expecting something ar
Humm.
Well, I can understand that. Going with a dual CPU system isn't going to
help me much is it? Hlds doesn't use SMP does it?
> On Wednesday, March 12, 2003 3:14 PM [GMT+1200=NZT],
> Me <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I forgot to mention that I have no mods running. I'm runnin NS. I
>> don
On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 14:28, Jeremy Brooking wrote:
> This is how threading is done (as well as the In-Reply-To header in some
> cases) If your client does thread on this, then it is breaking a
> commonly practised standard.
That should be 'does not thread on this' sorry.
___
I'm sorry, I'm PMSing right now. I'm going to go take some Beano.
-
Tyler "[TASF]Overkill" Schwend
"Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors."
---
Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged:
Counter-Strike: telefragged.lynchburg.edu:27015
http://schwend-t.web.lynchburg.edu
__
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003 2:18 PM [GMT+1200=NZT],
Tyler "Overkill" Schwend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I am. Excuse me for using Microsoft software, I'm such an
> idiot.
>
> I just don't see the point in changing the subject line in a
> thread that's already begun.
>
Lemme see... maybe s
>From my personal experience and that of other techs I work with, Tyan
motherboards have a high rate of defects. Although they have a nice set
of features, your chances of getting hosed are much higher if you go with
them.
> Get a twin set of p4 2.8ghz xeons with 8gb of ram and a SATA RAID, solve
On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 14:18, Tyler "Overkill" Schwend wrote:
> Yes, I am. Excuse me for using Microsoft software, I'm such an
> idiot.
>
> I just don't see the point in changing the subject line in a
> thread that's already begun.
>
If
A: your client cant handle that, then its thats your problem.
I concurr on the "Run CS part",
don't worry about them dirty Natrual Selection players, they are all ex-cs
players anyway :P
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Garner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] System utiliz
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003 3:14 PM [GMT+1200=NZT],
Me <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I forgot to mention that I have no mods running. I'm runnin NS. I
> don't know if that uses more CPU than CS or TFC.
>
Ohhh well there you go. Shoulda said that in the first place :)
NS is a terrible, terrible
Yes, I am. Excuse me for using Microsoft software, I'm such an
idiot.
I just don't see the point in changing the subject line in a
thread that's already begun.
-
Tyler "[TASF]Overkill" Schwend
"Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors."
---
Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged:
Co
I forgot to mention that I have no mods running. I'm runnin NS. I don't
know if that uses more CPU than CS or TFC.
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 02:36:29PM -0800, m0gely wrote:
>> >>the 44% utilization. I was expecting something around 10%. After
>> Not at 5 players though!?
>
> It is high. Someo
I'm running Redhat 8.0 with a custom built 2.4.20 kernel.
I have a web server that doesn't get many hits. I also use it for email.
Not much that would use any CPU time. It normally sits at 99.8% idle...
I've seen the web server use about 10% CPU but that's about it.
> ->-Original Message---
13 matches
Mail list logo
