On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 03:16:24 +0100 Stroller
strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
On 1 Oct 2010, at 23:18, Renat Golubchyk wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 17:13:24 + (UTC) Grant Edwards
grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote:
I've noticed recently that the Gentoo handbook web pages are
Hi,
fetchmail's log told me, that there is something wrong with the setup
of the certificats.
In the log there is the following section
fetchmail: Server certificate:
fetchmail: Issuer Organization: Thawte Consulting cc
fetchmail: Issuer CommonName: Thawte Premium Server CA
On Saturday 02 October 2010 11:31:38 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
fetchmail's log told me, that there is something wrong with the setup
of the certificats.
In the log there is the following section
fetchmail: Server certificate:
fetchmail: Issuer Organization: Thawte Consulting
On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 00:40 +0200, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
Hi all users,
Secondly, you can avoid any future requirement for this by sanitising
the newly installed .la files; this can be done either by using the
(currently testing) Portage 2.1.9 series, or by adding the following
snippet
Am 01.10.2010 18:23, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
On Friday 01 October 2010, Florian Philipp wrote:
Am 01.10.2010 03:12, schrieb Adam Carter:
Your harddisk seeks, everything is slow.
So does that then mean that my options are;
1. Defragment, so there is less seeking
2. Get an SSD
On Saturday 02 October 2010, Florian Philipp wrote:
Am 01.10.2010 18:23, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
On Friday 01 October 2010, Florian Philipp wrote:
Am 01.10.2010 03:12, schrieb Adam Carter:
Your harddisk seeks, everything is slow.
So does that then mean that my options are;
Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 19.51 +0800, William Kenworthy ha
scritto:
What are the implications of adding this snippet - will it come back
to bite us (users) when the next version of portage comes along?
No, it'll waste a bit of time if it's not removed because the same logic
is running
Am 02.10.2010 14:11, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
On Saturday 02 October 2010, Florian Philipp wrote:
[...]
Assumptions:
1. Seek time is constant. For HDDs we can take an average value. Of
course this doesn't work for tapes. They have a seek time which
increases linearly with the distance
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@gmail.com wrote:
Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 19.51 +0800, William Kenworthy ha
scritto:
What are the implications of adding this snippet - will it come back
to bite us (users) when the next version of portage comes along?
No,
Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com [10-10-02 13:52]:
On Saturday 02 October 2010 11:31:38 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
fetchmail's log told me, that there is something wrong with the setup
of the certificats.
In the log there is the following section
fetchmail: Server
Still on topic but I have a question and you are in the know on this.
I'm running unstable portage, 2.2_rc67 to be exact. Does this new a
version of portage take care of this already? It sounds like it is the
stable portage that has issues. I been running unstable for a long
while now.
Am 02.10.2010 14:44, schrieb Florian Philipp:
Am 02.10.2010 14:11, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
On Saturday 02 October 2010, Florian Philipp wrote:
[...]
Assumptions:
1. Seek time is constant. For HDDs we can take an average value. Of
course this doesn't work for tapes. They have a seek
Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 09.56 -0500, Dale ha scritto:
Still on topic but I have a question and you are in the know on
this.
I'm running unstable portage, 2.2_rc67 to be exact. Does this new a
version of portage take care of this already? It sounds like it is
the
stable portage
On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 11:00:33 -0600
Darren Kirby wrote:
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Al wrote:
Hello,
I want to find out by which file and line the */temp/environment
script is run or sourced.
As a am always interested in a general way to solve
On Saturday 02 October 2010 15:17:01 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com [10-10-02 13:52]:
On Saturday 02 October 2010 11:31:38 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
fetchmail's log told me, that there is something wrong with the setup
of the certificats.
In
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 09.56 -0500, Dale ha scritto:
Still on topic but I have a question and you are in the know on
this.
I'm running unstable portage, 2.2_rc67 to be exact. Does this new a
version of portage take care of this already? It sounds like it
On 10/01/2010 04:40 PM, James wrote:
Daniel Troeder daniel at admin-box.com writes:
As I read about the nice performance of btrfs with compression I tried
it out two weeks ago. I'll be posting my benchmarks to this list soon.
Until now I didn't have any problems, but still would not use
Hi,
KDE 4.5.2 hit the tree. It is still masked and/or keyworded but
anyway. Since I have them in my unmask/keyword file, portage wants to
upgrade. Thing is, it seems none of the mirrors have the tarballs for
4.5.2.
I also googled for some of them too. I was hoping I could download some
On Sunday 03 October 2010, Dale wrote:
Hi,
KDE 4.5.2 hit the tree. It is still masked and/or keyworded but
anyway. Since I have them in my unmask/keyword file, portage wants to
upgrade. Thing is, it seems none of the mirrors have the tarballs for
4.5.2.
I also googled for some of them
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Sunday 03 October 2010, Dale wrote:
Hi,
KDE 4.5.2 hit the tree. It is still masked and/or keyworded but
anyway. Since I have them in my unmask/keyword file, portage wants to
upgrade. Thing is, it seems none of the mirrors have the tarballs for
4.5.2.
I
On 2010-09-29 6:40 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
First of all, you should install lafilefixer and let it pass through the
currently-installed system:
# emerge lafilefixer
# lafilefixer --justfixit
This will convert the references to libtool archives to the -llibname
form, which works
Daniel Troeder daniel at admin-box.com writes:
$ mkfs.btrfs /dev/xyz
To use compression, just mount with -o compress.
/etc/fstab:
/dev/mapper/vg0-portage /gentoo btrfs noatime,compress 0 2
I installed sys-fs/btrfs-progs-0.19-r1 and I have the 'acl' flag on.
Fair enough,
thanks
James
Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 19.14 -0400, Tanstaafl ha scritto:
For those of us who prefer to stay with the stable portage, am I
correct
that once the 2.1.9 portage series goes stable, that we would then
remove the above from /etc/portage/bashrc? What would happen if I
forgot
to do so
23 matches
Mail list logo
