Hi All,
I am having a strange problem with one of my computers and I
am not able to discover where is the problem. Maybe someone
on the list have had a similar experience...
The computer aparently is running normally but suddenly it
reboot itself without any warning or message.
Sometimes it happ
On 06/14/03 20:55, Swapana Ghosh wrote:
What kind of HDs? What's the load
What kind of HDs?
like when its taking an hour to send mail?
Load is varying 15 - 22 ...in this server only i am
running sendmail
NO other processing is going on.
Something is not right if the load is that high.
What ki
Hi
>>How much memory does this box have?
The OS Redhat linux 8.0
Mem: 517156864 306970624 2101862400 54534144
178073600
Swap: 107347148820480 1073451008
MemTotal: 505036 kB
MemFree:205260 kB
MemShared: 0 kB
Buffers: 53256 kB
Cached: 173892
dep wrote:
begin Ted Ozolins's quote:
| Has anyone on this list used the upgrade path for Slackware 8.1 to
| 9.0? Any kaveats?
no, they use binary tarballs. i think that gentoo is the only distro
that uses kaveats.
Heck, I'm not going to touch this one, (misplaced my flame-proof suit) : )
On 06/14/03 20:12, Kurt Wall wrote:
Quoth Net Llama!:
On 06/14/03 17:36, Kurt Wall wrote:
>Quoth Net Llama!:
>>i figured out why i can't build kernels on the one box (and yes, its all
>>kernels):
>>http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2002-09/msg00070.html
>>
>>A few months back i updated the
On 06/14/03 20:07, David A. Bandel wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 18:48:07 -0700
"Net Llama!" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 06/14/03 17:36, Kurt Wall wrote:
> Quoth Net Llama!:
>> i figured out why i can't build kernels on the one box (and yes,
>its all > kernels):
>> http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/b
Quoth David A. Bandel:
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 18:48:07 -0700
> "Net Llama!" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Well, i'm not having problems with 'make mrproper' & 'make xconfig'
> > anymore. I'm in the middle of 'make bzImage' at the moment, and
> > things appear to be going well. stupid make.
>
Quoth Net Llama!:
> On 06/14/03 17:36, Kurt Wall wrote:
> >Quoth Net Llama!:
> >>i figured out why i can't build kernels on the one box (and yes, its all
> >>kernels):
> >>http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2002-09/msg00070.html
> >>
> >>A few months back i updated the version of make that
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 18:48:07 -0700
"Net Llama!" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 06/14/03 17:36, Kurt Wall wrote:
> > Quoth Net Llama!:
> >> i figured out why i can't build kernels on the one box (and yes,
> >its all > kernels):
> >> http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2002-09/msg00070.html
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Mathews wrote:
| Change the QUEUE to something like 5m to process it once a minute. This
| is extreme, so use it at your own risk.
Typo. 5m is every 5 minutes, not once a minute. Sorry.
#cd /pub
#more beer
- --
Andrew Mathews
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Swapana Ghosh wrote:
| Hi
|
| When i am processing 10,000 subscribers for the
| mailing list testing, then the records took 15 mints
| to clear the qmail queue and after 15 mints i checked
| that all the records came to sendmail queue and then
| it
How much memory does this box have? What kind of HDs? What's the load
like when its taking an hour to send mail? Which version of sendmail?
Which kernel version? What kind of network connection do you have (type
& speed)?
On 06/14/03 18:54, Swapana Ghosh wrote:
Hi
When i am processin
Hi
When i am processing 10,000 subscribers for the
mailing list testing, then the records took 15 mints
to clear the qmail queue and after 15 mints i checked
that all the records came to sendmail queue and then
it started for clearing the queue.
But when the same testing i did with 50,00
On 06/14/03 17:36, Kurt Wall wrote:
Quoth Net Llama!:
i figured out why i can't build kernels on the one box (and yes, its all
kernels):
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2002-09/msg00070.html
A few months back i updated the version of make that i had installed so
that i could build the
Quoth Net Llama!:
> i figured out why i can't build kernels on the one box (and yes, its all
> kernels):
> http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2002-09/msg00070.html
>
> A few months back i updated the version of make that i had installed so
> that i could build the latest stable version of
i figured out why i can't build kernels on the one box (and yes, its all
kernels):
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2002-09/msg00070.html
A few months back i updated the version of make that i had installed so
that i could build the latest stable version of xawtv. At the time
3.80rc2
Quoth dep:
> begin Ted Ozolins's quote:
> | Has anyone on this list used the upgrade path for Slackware 8.1 to
> | 9.0? Any kaveats?
>
> no, they use binary tarballs. i think that gentoo is the only distro
> that uses kaveats.
Nope. That´s KDE.
Kurt
--
One is not superior merely because one
begin Ted Ozolins's quote:
| Has anyone on this list used the upgrade path for Slackware 8.1 to
| 9.0? Any kaveats?
no, they use binary tarballs. i think that gentoo is the only distro
that uses kaveats.
--
dep
http://www.linuxandmain.com -- outside the box, barely within
the envelope, and no
Thanks to Kurt Wall we now have a Step on Building Kernel 2.4.21 with XFS.
You may find this step at http://www.linux-sxs.org/upgrading/linux_2421_xfs.html
___
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/
On 06/14/03 14:03, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 14 June 2003 16:58 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
This is going to hell rather quickly. So i finally applied what looks
to be the correct XFS patch, and I still can't get as far as 'make
mrproper' without something blowing up. This is the same box that
Quoth Kurt Wall:
It's bad form, I know, to follow up my own post. Live with it.
> I start with a fresh 2.4.19 tarball:
>
> $ tar -jxf linux-2.4.19.bz2
> $ find linux-2.4.19 -name \*rej -print | wc -l
>0
>
> Patch to 2.4.20:
>
> $ bunzip2 -c patch-2.4.20.bz2 | patch -p0
> [...]
> $ mv 2
On Saturday 14 June 2003 16:58 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
> This is going to hell rather quickly. So i finally applied what looks
> to be the correct XFS patch, and I still can't get as far as 'make
> mrproper' without something blowing up. This is the same box that
> i've built every previous 2.4.x k
> > >>On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
> > Maybe it's not cooked yet.
> > >>>
[ lots of other fuzz snipped ]
Quote says it all. This all reminds me of the number 1 reason why I
don't run XFS. XFS seems to be an excellent FS, but I'm entirely too
lazy to put up with the patchwork quilt ap
This is going to hell rather quickly. So i finally applied what looks
to be the correct XFS patch, and I still can't get as far as 'make
mrproper' without something blowing up. This is the same box that i've
built every previous 2.4.x kernel since 2.4.0, without a hitch.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lin
You are correct sir. There is a 2.4.21-rc3, which i've yet to try.
On 06/14/03 11:39, Jerry McBride wrote:
Problem There's no acpi patch for 2.4.21 on sourceforge
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 10:04:27 -0700 Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ahhh...acpi has been known to be mostly broken in the
On 06/14/03 12:17, Kurt Wall wrote:
Quoth Net Llama!:
On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
>>Maybe it's not cooked yet.
>
>The patch didn´t apply cleanly to stock 2.4.21 sources, so I didn´t even
>bother trying to compile it. There were a dozen or so rejects and way
>to much fuzz...
huh? the only
> Kurt Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoth Chris Kassopulo:
> >
> > When dri is enabled in XF86Config, X complains
> > on startup:
> >
> > i830.o unresolved symbols
> > rwsem_down_write_failed
> > rwsem_wake
> > insmod i830 failed
>
> This is a module
Quoth Net Llama!:
> On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
> >>Maybe it's not cooked yet.
> >
> >The patch didn´t apply cleanly to stock 2.4.21 sources, so I didn´t even
> >bother trying to compile it. There were a dozen or so rejects and way
> >to much fuzz...
>
> huh? the only discrepancy that i g
Hi Andrew
Thanks a lot
I waited almost 1 hr just to see if my luck
favours. But i found that after more than an hr mail
started to generate from the queue and finally all
mails have been sent...
Best Regards.
-Swapna
__
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Ya
Quoth Net Llama!:
> On 06/14/03 08:08, Bruce Marshall wrote:
>
> >On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:55 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> >>On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
> Maybe it's not cooked yet.
> >>>
> >>> The patch didn´t apply cleanly to stock 2.4.21 sources, so I didn´t
> >>> even bother trying
Quoth Bruce Marshall:
[Kurt´s 2.4.21 + XFS woes]
> Strange, I didn't see any errors the first time and so I just loaded it
> up all again and re-patched it. Still no errors.
I start with a fresh 2.4.19 tarball:
$ tar -jxf linux-2.4.19.bz2
$ find linux-2.4.19 -name \*rej -print | wc -l
Hi Andrew
Thanks a lot... Now the mail are coming to my
queue and i am not seeing any rejectiong of smtp
connection in the maillog. So qmail is sending
the mail without holding those defeffed mails in its
queue.
But one problem is there . All the mails are
now gathered in the /
Problem There's no acpi patch for 2.4.21 on sourceforge
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 10:04:27 -0700 Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ahhh...acpi has been known to be mostly broken in the vanilla 2.4.x
> kernels. From what i've read, in order to get useful acpi support, you
> either need to
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:30:18 -0700
"Net Llama!" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 06/14/03 09:22, David A. Bandel wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 10:48:42 -0400
> > Bruce Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > don´t know why you guys are having such problems. The
> > linux-2.4.21-xfs. patch
Quoth Ted Ozolins:
> Has anyone on this list used the upgrade path for Slackware 8.1 to 9.0?
Do you mean the upgrade as described in the upgrading file on the CDs?
No. I just wiped it clean and installed 9.0.
> Any kaveats?
Nothing untoward here, so far.
Kurt
--
Finding out what goes on in th
On 06/14/03 09:27, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 14 June 2003 12:14 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
that throws my theory out. so, can anyone explain what the new option
'PGE extensions' is under 'processor type & features'? it looks to be
something useful on pentium compatibles for high memory support
Ahhh...acpi has been known to be mostly broken in the vanilla 2.4.x
kernels. From what i've read, in order to get useful acpi support, you
either need to go to 2.5.x or apply the acpi patch from acpi.sf.net.
On 06/14/03 09:43, Jerry McBride wrote:
I'm using vanilla kernel source...
On Sat, 14
On Saturday 14 June 2003 12:22 pm, David A. Bandel wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 10:48:42 -0400
> Bruce Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> don´t know why you guys are having such problems. The
> linux-2.4.21-xfs. patch (not yet in 2.4.21 directory, but in the
> snapshot directory) worked fine.
On Saturday 14 June 2003 12:53 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/14/03 09:27, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 12:14 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> that throws my theory out. so, can anyone explain what the new
> >> option 'PGE extensions' is under 'processor type & features'? it
> >> l
On Saturday 14 June 2003 12:53 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/14/03 09:27, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 12:14 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> that throws my theory out. so, can anyone explain what the new
> >> option 'PGE extensions' is under 'processor type & features'? it
> >> l
I'm using vanilla kernel source...
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:09:44 -0700 Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 06/14/03 09:00, Jerry McBride wrote:
>
> > Well... with all the talk about 2.4.21 on the net and this mail list... I
> > grabbed a copy and started fooling around.
> > Other odd thi
After 194 days, Marcelo seems to have released 2.4.21
final:
- 2.4.21-rc8 was released as 2.4.21 with no changes.
Summary of changes from v2.4.21-rc7 to v2.4.21-rc8
Geert Uytterhoeven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
o Fix ext2fs warning
Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL
On 06/14/03 09:22, David A. Bandel wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 10:48:42 -0400
Bruce Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
don´t know why you guys are having such problems. The
linux-2.4.21-xfs. patch (not yet in 2.4.21 directory, but in the
snapshot directory) worked fine. My situation:
I opened 2.
On Saturday 14 June 2003 12:14 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/14/03 09:05, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 11:24 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> On 06/14/03 08:08, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> >> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:55 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> >> On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wro
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 10:48:42 -0400
Bruce Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
don´t know why you guys are having such problems. The
linux-2.4.21-xfs. patch (not yet in 2.4.21 directory, but in the
snapshot directory) worked fine. My situation:
I opened 2.4.19, patched to .20 then to .21 then appl
On 06/14/03 09:14, Net Llama! wrote:
that throws my theory out. so, can anyone explain what the new option
'PGE extensions' is under 'processor type & features'? it looks to be
something useful on pentium compatibles for high memory support, but i
can't find a good explanation that doesn't req
On 06/14/03 09:05, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 14 June 2003 11:24 am, Net Llama! wrote:
On 06/14/03 08:08, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:55 am, Net Llama! wrote:
>> On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
>> >> Maybe it's not cooked yet.
>> >
>> > The patch didn´t apply clea
On 06/14/03 09:00, Jerry McBride wrote:
Well... with all the talk about 2.4.21 on the net and this mail list... I
grabbed a copy and started fooling around.
Other odd thing with 2.4.21, acpi or apm both fail to modprobe horribly... I'm
not able to cleanly shutdown-h without either power manager l
On Saturday 14 June 2003 11:24 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/14/03 08:08, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:55 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
> >> >> Maybe it's not cooked yet.
> >> >
> >> > The patch didn´t apply cleanly to stock 2.4.21 sources,
Well... with all the talk about 2.4.21 on the net and this mail list... I
grabbed a copy and started fooling around.
BOY, did I get some odd mixed results...
Framebuffer support in this ga release is very good. I'm able to capture video
with my wingo and ctl-atl-fnc-X to a terminal and not cras
Has anyone on this list used the upgrade path for Slackware 8.1 to 9.0?
Any kaveats?
TIA
Ted Ozolins (VE7TVO)
Westbank, B.C.
Save your PC, remove M$ : )
___
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/
On 06/14/03 08:08, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:55 am, Net Llama! wrote:
On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
>> Maybe it's not cooked yet.
>
> The patch didn´t apply cleanly to stock 2.4.21 sources, so I didn´t
> even bother trying to compile it. There were a dozen or so rejec
It is indeed a postscript printer.
The problem happens on all files. There's nothing odd about the
actual postscript code.
I'm assuming that the problem is in the driver, but not sure which
part of LPRNg is actually serving that function, and hoping someone
can tell me a bit.
++ kevin
On Fri,
On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:55 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
> >> Maybe it's not cooked yet.
> >
> > The patch didn´t apply cleanly to stock 2.4.21 sources, so I didn´t
> > even bother trying to compile it. There were a dozen or so rejects
> > and way to much fuzz...
>
On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:59 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/14/03 07:53, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:43 am, Kurt Wall wrote:
> >> Quoth Bruce Marshall:
> >> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:13 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> > > On 06/14/03 07:07, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> >>
> >>
On 06/14/03 07:53, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:43 am, Kurt Wall wrote:
Quoth Bruce Marshall:
> On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:13 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> > On 06/14/03 07:07, Bruce Marshall wrote:
[slash]
> > > Wouldn't this be the right patch?
> > >
> > > Put up yesterday aftern
On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote:
Maybe it's not cooked yet.
The patch didn´t apply cleanly to stock 2.4.21 sources, so I didn´t even
bother trying to compile it. There were a dozen or so rejects and way
to much fuzz...
huh? the only discrepancy that i got was:
patching file linux/drivers/block/
On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:43 am, Kurt Wall wrote:
> Quoth Bruce Marshall:
> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:13 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> > > On 06/14/03 07:07, Bruce Marshall wrote:
>
> [slash]
>
> > > > Wouldn't this be the right patch?
> > > >
> > > > Put up yesterday afternoon...
> > > >
> > > > f
On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:43 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/14/03 07:36, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:13 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> On 06/14/03 07:07, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> >> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 9:17 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> >> On 06/13/03 22:53, Kurt Wall wrot
On 06/14/03 07:36, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:13 am, Net Llama! wrote:
On 06/14/03 07:07, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> On Saturday 14 June 2003 9:17 am, Net Llama! wrote:
>> On 06/13/03 22:53, Kurt Wall wrote:
>> > Yup, as the Llama informed us, 2.4.21 has been released.
>> > Unfo
Quoth Bruce Marshall:
> On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:13 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> > On 06/14/03 07:07, Bruce Marshall wrote:
[slash]
> > > Wouldn't this be the right patch?
> > >
> > > Put up yesterday afternoon...
> > >
> > > ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/Release-1.3/kernel_patches
> >
>
On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:13 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/14/03 07:07, Bruce Marshall wrote:
> > On Saturday 14 June 2003 9:17 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> >> On 06/13/03 22:53, Kurt Wall wrote:
> >> > Yup, as the Llama informed us, 2.4.21 has been released.
> >> > Unfortunately, the XFS patch set fo
On 06/14/03 07:07, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Saturday 14 June 2003 9:17 am, Net Llama! wrote:
On 06/13/03 22:53, Kurt Wall wrote:
> Yup, as the Llama informed us, 2.4.21 has been released.
> Unfortunately, the XFS patch set for 2.4.21 doesn´t apply cleanly
> (here), so I´ll have to wait until SGI ge
On Saturday 14 June 2003 9:17 am, Net Llama! wrote:
> On 06/13/03 22:53, Kurt Wall wrote:
> > Yup, as the Llama informed us, 2.4.21 has been released.
> > Unfortunately, the XFS patch set for 2.4.21 doesn´t apply cleanly
> > (here), so I´ll have to wait until SGI gets a clean patch out. :-(
>
> Yea
On 06/13/03 22:53, Kurt Wall wrote:
Yup, as the Llama informed us, 2.4.21 has been released. Unfortunately,
the XFS patch set for 2.4.21 doesn´t apply cleanly (here), so I´ll have
to wait until SGI gets a clean patch out. :-(
Yea, me too. Plus i'm wondering if the acpi patch for 2.4.21-rc3 will
Quoth James McDonald:
> folks,
>
> After compiling a program the first time if you update the source later
> and then rerun make again will it just update the bits that are changed
> or do you need to do a complete make clean and start the compile from
> scratch?
This is what make was designed
On Saturday 14 June 2003 6:26 am, someone claiming to be James McDonald wrote:
> folks,
>
> After compiling a program the first time if you update the source later
> and then rerun make again will it just update the bits that are changed
> or do you need to do a complete make clean and start the co
folks,
After compiling a program the first time if you update the source later
and then rerun make again will it just update the bits that are changed
or do you need to do a complete make clean and start the compile from
scratch?
James
___
Linux-use
I have looked over the man page for pcal, and can't find a way to make a
contiguous range of dates, like 07/01/03 to 07/13/03.
Any suggestions welcome.
Joel
___
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs
69 matches
Mail list logo
