On 03/29/2016 03:27 AM, Ajay Garg wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> Surprisingly, I could not find this on google :-\
>
> We are trying to use vanilla POSIX-socket-APIs, but we are unable to
> connect if the URL is on the other side of the proxy.
> Is there a socket-option wherein this would be allowed?
>
>
On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 00:53 +0200, Felix Becker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thank you for that info. Can you tell which mailing list the right one
> for this issue is?
lkml was fine.
I guess you could try to CC Al Viro
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the bo
Hi,
thank you for that info. Can you tell which mailing list the right one
for this issue is?
Felix
On 04/23/2013 02:37 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 00:30 +, Eric Wong wrote:
>> Cc:-ing netdev (no comments of my own)
>>
>> Felix Becker wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I tried to
On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 00:30 +, Eric Wong wrote:
> Cc:-ing netdev (no comments of my own)
>
> Felix Becker wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I tried to figure out how old my TCP connections are and took a look
> > at /proc//fd/ using 'ls -la' / 'stat'.
> >
Thanks, but its not a network issue, /proc/pi
Cc:-ing netdev (no comments of my own)
Felix Becker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tried to figure out how old my TCP connections are and took a look
> at /proc//fd/ using 'ls -la' / 'stat'.
>
> When I'm creating a new socket in my application, the time stamps
> returned by stat / ls -la are correct - as e
On 12/11/07, Steven Cavanagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey Grant,
>
> I added the FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE flag and added the tests I completed on the
> wiki. Looks okay thus far.
> I'm also corresponding with OGAWA (cool!) on this patch., as you've noticed.
:-( Actually I haven't. Looks like your
On 11 Sep 2007 at 17:04, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 05:54:38PM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
>
> > If not, any clues on debugging/tracing? There's a
> > /usr/src/linux/Documentation/oops-tracing.txt, but no "segfault-tracing".
>
> That would be because it has fsck-all to do with the
On Sep 11 2007 17:54, Ulrich Windl wrote:
>> > Aug 31 15:04:40 kgate1 kernel: powersaved[10102]: segfault at
>> > 0008 rip
>> > 0042c17a rsp 7fffea55de00 error 4
>[...]
>> segfaulting are sysloged only on 64bits kernel.
>>
>> Maybe your slapd/hscan processes are doing ba
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 05:54:38PM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> If not, any clues on debugging/tracing? There's a
> /usr/src/linux/Documentation/oops-tracing.txt, but no "segfault-tracing".
That would be because it has fsck-all to do with the kernel. Get the
coredump, then use gdb to deal with
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:15:26 +0200
"Ulrich Windl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11 Sep 2007 at 15:01, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> [...]
> > > Also note that the i586 (32-bit, non-SMP) kernel does not have that
> > > problem.
> > > Linux version 2.6.16.53-0.8-default ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc versio
On 11 Sep 2007 at 15:01, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 11:30:38 +0200
> "Ulrich Windl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > since upgrading from SLES9 SP3 to SLES10 SP1 I see kernel segfaults which
> > seem
> > network-related: Most notably slapd does not run any more, and
On 11 Sep 2007 at 15:01, Eric Dumazet wrote:
[...]
> > Also note that the i586 (32-bit, non-SMP) kernel does not have that problem.
> > Linux version 2.6.16.53-0.8-default ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 4.1.2
> > 20070115
> > (prerelease) (SUSE Linux)) #1 Fri Aug 31 13:07:27 UTC 2007
>
> Are
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 11:30:38 +0200
"Ulrich Windl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> since upgrading from SLES9 SP3 to SLES10 SP1 I see kernel segfaults which
> seem
> network-related: Most notably slapd does not run any more, and my
> sendmail-milter
> based virus scanner terminates now an
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for your quick reply.
>
> > If that were true, anyone who could send those packets to your
> > machine would
> > be able to cause the system to hang too.
>
> You're right to say that :)
>
> > Perhaps you are feeding the packets
> > back in at too high a layer.
>
> Not really
Hi David,
Thanks for your quick reply.
> If that were true, anyone who could send those packets to your machine would
> be able to cause the system to hang too.
You're right to say that :)
> Perhaps you are feeding the packets
> back in at too high a layer.
Not really. In fact, I pass the pack
> The problem happens like this:
> Once the socket is closed by the user-space application, there are
> still packets left in the module's queue. Now, the moment the kernel
> timer expires and the module propagates those packets up into the
> higher layer, the system hangs.
If that were true, any
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 07:31:55PM -0400, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > post. :-) But I thought sendfile() could only be used for sending data
> > from a "regular" file descriptor to another file- or socket descriptor..?
>
> he said the syscall (ie, interface) already existed,
> not that it was implemente
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:31:00PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 12:28:52AM +0200, Joel Eriksson wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am a kernel hacking newbie and am struggling to understand the
> > networking subsystem. I would like to be able to add a systemcall,
> > preferably as
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 12:28:52AM +0200, Joel Eriksson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am a kernel hacking newbie and am struggling to understand the
> networking subsystem. I would like to be able to add a systemcall,
> preferably asynchronous, that connects a socket with a filedescriptor
> (proxy(srcsd,
- Received message begins Here -
Admin Mailing Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
[snip]
>> There are dozens of similarly different (or differently similar - as your
>> prefer) Linux based O/Ses distributions around the world and some have had
>> 6.x versionning when RedHat was also 6
[Gérard Roudier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> There are dozens of similarly different (or differently similar - as
> your prefer) Linux based O/Ses distributions around the world and
> some have had 6.x versionning when RedHat was also 6.x (SuSe for
> example).
True enough. But empirically, I have not
>
> > Note that I deliberately ignored my assumption when replying -- I gave
> > instructions for Debian derivations, even though I don't know of any
> > Debian-derived distribution with a version number 6.2.
>
> There are dozens of similarly different (or differently similar - as your
> prefer)
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Peter Samuelson]
> > > But it really bugs me when someone uses the term 'Linux 6.2' (:
> > > I could not resist pointing out the distinction.
>
> [Gérard Roudier]
> > You seem to do the same confusion of assuming that Linux is RedHat. Note
>
[Peter Samuelson]
> > But it really bugs me when someone uses the term 'Linux 6.2' (:
> > I could not resist pointing out the distinction.
[Gérard Roudier]
> You seem to do the same confusion of assuming that Linux is RedHat. Note
> that it is not your fault. We all are so screwed by marke
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Peter Samuelson]
> > > There is no Linux 6.2. The newest version is a prerelease of 2.4.0.
>
> [Igmar Palsenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> > I'll bet you a beer he's using RedHat :)
A german beer ? ;-)
> Yes, yes. You know he's using Red Hat and
[Peter Samuelson]
> > There is no Linux 6.2. The newest version is a prerelease of 2.4.0.
[Igmar Palsenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> I'll bet you a beer he's using RedHat :)
Yes, yes. You know he's using Red Hat and I know he's using Red Hat.
But it really bugs me when someone uses the term '
Sorry for No Subject ...
I accidentaly sent it before filling Subject :(
Andrej
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Eric Chen]
> > I have brought up a PC running Linux 6.2.
>
> There is no Linux 6.2. The newest version is a prerelease of 2.4.0.
I'll bet you a beer he's using RedHat :)
> In any case, I suggest you look at a client for the 'finger' protocol,
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Chen, Eric wrote:
> Dear Helpers:
>
> This is a question from a Linux idiot. Please bear with me. I have brought
> up a PC running Linux 6.2. I need to develop a simple C program using
> TCP/IP protocol (socket interface) to talk to another PC on the network. I
> need so
[Eric Chen]
> I have brought up a PC running Linux 6.2.
There is no Linux 6.2. The newest version is a prerelease of 2.4.0.
Unlike other OSes you may be familiar with (e.g. FreeBSD), there is no
de facto standard distribution of kernel and apps -- there are half a
dozen major players and hundr
30 matches
Mail list logo
