A while back, there was a suggestion made to build bash from updated
sources (patched for variations of the "shellshock" vulnerabilities),
simply mv /usr/bin/bash to another name and install a link to the newly
built program.
I pointed out that this might not be a good idea without first carefully
4 ноября 2014 г. 14:14:38 CET, "Nikola M." пишет:
>On 11/ 4/14 12:01 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
>> 4 ноября 2014 г. 7:41:59 CET, "Nikola M." пишет:
>>> On 11/ 3/14 07:55 PM, Brogyányi József wrote:
Hi
I'd like to add a SSD to my pool but I need to move the rpool
>mirror.
>>> ZFS does not car
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Jim Klimov wrote:
> >On Mon, 3 Nov 2014, Bruce Lilly wrote:
> >>
> >> As of this late date, /usr/bin/bash here is in fact the bash
> >executable,
> >> not a link; but that means that it's 32-bit only and might well
> [...]
> So most of the programs (thousands of bi
Hi Nikola
"/if first disk fails or get removed, I would expect system to boot
right away from second device that is on rpool/? "
-*You're right. I tried it*.
"/So if one has mirrored rpool and boot device fails,/..."
-*The system is starting with one rpool device (any of them). Nothing to
d
On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, david allan finch wrote:
On 04/11/2014 03:36, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
While it would be nice if Solaris software was all 64-bit, in actual
practice I notice no difference in day to day use between systems with
32-bit applications and 64-bit. Only certain memory-hungry
appli
On 11/ 4/14 12:01 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
4 ноября 2014 г. 7:41:59 CET, "Nikola M." пишет:
On 11/ 3/14 07:55 PM, Brogyányi József wrote:
Hi
I'd like to add a SSD to my pool but I need to move the rpool mirror.
ZFS does not care at what port disks are pugged in and in what order.
Zfs doesn't ca
4 ноября 2014 г. 7:41:59 CET, "Nikola M." пишет:
>On 11/ 3/14 07:55 PM, Brogyányi József wrote:
>> Hi
>> I'd like to add a SSD to my pool but I need to move the rpool mirror.
>
>> I have sata2 and sata3 ports. Of course rpool mirror occupied the
>> sata3 ports.
>> Do I need to issue any command b
4 ноября 2014 г. 4:36:39 CET, Bob Friesenhahn
пишет:
>On Mon, 3 Nov 2014, Bruce Lilly wrote:
>>
>> As of this late date, /usr/bin/bash here is in fact the bash
>executable,
>> not a link; but that means that it's 32-bit only and might well
>present
>> unexpected issues on 64-bit systems when deal
On 04/11/2014 09:07, david allan finch wrote:
we stuck with 64bit compiles
sorry 32bit compiles
___
openindiana-discuss mailing list
openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
On 04/11/2014 03:36, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
While it would be nice if Solaris software was all 64-bit, in actual
practice I notice no difference in day to day use between systems with
32-bit applications and 64-bit. Only certain memory-hungry
applications will significantly benefit.
We spent
10 matches
Mail list logo
