>
> From: Nico Kadel-Garcia
>To: Nico Kadel-Garcia ; James M. Pulver
>; "scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov"
>
>Sent: Tuesday, 14 April 2015, 3:02
>Subject: Re: need SSD RAID controller advice
>
>
>On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Konstantin Olchanski
>
>
>
>
> wro
From:"Nico Kadel-Garcia"
Date:Tue, 14 Apr, 2015 at 0:29
Subject:Re: need SSD RAID controller advice
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Konstantin Olchanski
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:25:51AM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 8:10 AM, James M. Pulver wrote:
>> >
On 11/02/14 19:49, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 09, 2014 at 04:44:22AM -0800, Henrique C. S. Junior wrote:
>> I'd like to know what people think about (possible) future scenarios for
>> Scientific Linux. Let's say:
>> - If SL becomes a CentOS SIG (builded using the CentOS Core) does
On 15/01/14 23:34, John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:27:18PM -0800, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
>> *Of course* Red Hat has acquired CentOS. SIngh et. al. are now
>> full-time RedHat employees (proof left as exercise for the reader).
>> The relationship could hardly be more clear.
id...
>As I've said before can we please stop this speculation train its giving me a
>migraine and I want to get off lol.
>
>-- Sent from my HP Pre3
>
>
>
>On Jan 9, 2014 20:46, zxq9 wrote:
>
>On Friday 10 January 2014 01:14:02 Ia
On 10/01/14 00:16, jdow wrote:
> On 2014/01/09 16:00, Ian Murray wrote:
>> On 09/01/14 23:27, Ian Murray wrote:
>>> On 09/01/14 22:53, jdow wrote:
>>>> Ian, I suspect the SL staff position is more proper engineering with
>>>> it's concern abou
On 09/01/14 23:27, Ian Murray wrote:
> On 09/01/14 22:53, jdow wrote:
>> Ian, I suspect the SL staff position is more proper engineering with
>> it's concern about what could possibly go wrong than it is about
>> minimizing their work or compromising their main sponsor&
On 09/01/14 23:13, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
> SL is an exact match to RHEL with only a few variations such as the
> removed the client for Red Hats support site integration and added a
> few things like AFS because their labs need it. The differences are
> well documented in the release notes and
FWIW, I don't feel link I sponge... I merely drink from the same open
source cup that SL and Red Hat does. I have a few lines of code accepted
in the Xen project; does that mean all Xen users (4.3+) are sponging off
me? I don't think so.
>
> I do note that for the machine on w
On 09/01/14 21:12, William R. Somsky wrote:
> One thing people should keep in mind while discussing this is the why
> the original Fermilab distro (and Cern distro) which then became
> Scientific Linux was created, and why Fermilab continues to actively
> commit resources to SL. Remember Fermilab (
- Original Message -
> From: Connie Sieh
> To: scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov; scientific-linux-de...@fnal.gov
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, 8 January 2014, 19:53
> Subject: Centos / Redhat announcement
>
> We are in the process of researching/evaluating this news and how it
> impacts S
> The mail system
>
>: connect to
> alt2.aspmx.l.google.com[2607:f8b0:400c:c03::1a]:25: Network is unreachable
>
Not followed the thread, but a quick squint looks like it is trying to deliver
over IPv6, doesn't it?
12 matches
Mail list logo
