David S. Miller wrote:
Matti Aarnio writes:
I am contemplating to periodically turn off the ECN bit to
let email out, but DaveM has veto there.
I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
get people to fix their kit.
We will remove these people, that's
Alexander Viro wrote:
Stop here. You have a hole in quota file. You are not supposed to.
I think it's a misfit between Linus' kernel and the
quota tools from http://sourceforge.net/projects/linuxquota/
Running `quotacheck' creates an aquota.user which is
only ~7200 bytes in size. But the
Richard Gooch wrote:
In fact, hopefully he's still in a dark mood, and he may take up the
suggestion to bounce mails of the following type:
- MIME encoded
- HTML encoded
- quoted printables (those stupid =20 things are particuarly hard to
read).
Surely it'd be better to get the list to
Richard Gooch wrote:
Dave sent a message out a week or two ago saying he was going to do it
soon. And back in January he said he'd be doing it in February. The
kernel list FAQ has stated this right at the top, in big, bright red
letters. Yesterday, after I saw Dave's announcement, I updated
Rogier Wolff wrote:
The we'll turn it on in February warning is worth NOTHING in this
situation: February comes and goes. March comes and goes. Everybody
who read the warning will think: Ok, so I must be fine.
A warning of the form: ECN will go on as soon as this message clears
the queues
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Jan Harkes wrote:
something like,
ssize_t kioctl(int fd, int type, int cmd, void *inbuf, size_t inlen,
void *outbuf, size_t outlen);
As far as functionality and errors it works like read/write in a single
call, pretty much what Richard
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 06:51:57AM -0500, Brent D. Norris wrote:
I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
get people to fix their kit.
Isn't this a problem though because the messge saying that ECN was enabled
was set after ECN was enabled? Thus these people
Matti Aarnio writes:
I am contemplating to periodically turn off the ECN bit to
let email out, but DaveM has veto there.
I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
get people to fix their kit.
We will remove these people, that's all.
Since HTML email also
Brent D. Norris writes:
I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
get people to fix their kit.
We will remove these people, that's all.
Isn't this a problem though because the messge saying that ECN was
enabled was set after ECN was enabled? Thus these
I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
get people to fix their kit.
Isn't this a problem though because the messge saying that ECN was enabled
was set after ECN was enabled? Thus these people have no idea what is
going on and they probably won't know what to fix
Not to mention, not everyone on the list runs their own mailservers.
-Original Message-
From: Steve Modica [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 12:28
To: Rogier Wolff
Cc: Richard Gooch; Brent D. Norris; David S. Miller;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL
FOLKS, I HAVE ALL THE TIME USED 'Reply-To:' HEADER POINTING
TO linux-kernel -- INSTEAD OF ALL THE LISTS...
If you want to continue this, do it there.
(Before I decide to taboo Re: ECN is on! subject line..)
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 12:23:29PM -0400, Richard Gooch wrote:
...
Well,
On Tuesday 22 May 2001 17:24, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Monday 21 May 2001 19:16, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
What I'd like to see:
- An interface for registering an array of related devices
(almost always two: raw and ctl) and their legacy
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote:
I don't think it's likely to be even workable. Just consider the
directory entry for a moment - is it going to be marked d or [cb]?
It's going to be marked 'd', it's a directory, not a file.
Are we talking about the same proposal? The one where
What is the communication between user space and kernel
that transports device identities?
It doesn't change, the same symbolic names still work.
But today, unless you think of devfs or so, device identities
are not transported by symbolic names. They are given by
device numbers.
[Yes,
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote: Actually, the LVM snapshot
interface has (optional) hooks into the filesystem to ensure that it
is consistent at the time the snapshot is created.
But I think that LVM is implemented the wrong way
On Monday 21 May 2001 19:16, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
What I'd like to see:
- An interface for registering an array of related devices (almost
always two: raw and ctl) and their legacy device numbers with a
single userspace callout that does whatever /dev/ creation needs to
be done. Thus,
On Monday 21 May 2001 14:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about:
# mkpart /dev/sda /dev/mypartition -o size=1024k,type=swap
# ls /dev/mypartition
basesizedevicetype
Generally, we shouldn't care which order the kernel enumerates
devices in or which
Matti Aarnio writes:
I am contemplating to periodically turn off the ECN bit to
let email out, but DaveM has veto there.
I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
get people to fix their kit.
We will remove these people, that's all.
Later,
David S. Miller
[EMAIL
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 04:31:37PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
`the class of devices in question' was cryptographic devices, and possibly
other transactional DSPs. I don't consider audio to be transactional.
in any case, you can do transactional things with two threads, as long
as they each
Richard Gooch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sure, Dave is being bloody-minded, but that's the only way we'll see
people get off their fat, lazy asses and fix their broken systems.
In fact, hopefully he's still in a dark mood, and he may take up the
suggestion to bounce mails of the following
... and immediately I have been able to verify a bunch of
domains/servers which won't get thru when incoming connection
has ECN.I tested all of these with Linux running ECN, and
Solaris 2.6 without ECN. When Solaris got connection, and
ECN-Linux didn't, domain and its server got listed.
Andreas,
I think that the issue is something different. Suppose the snapshot has
been created. I know that this can be done safely with the API's you
allude to. Life goes on and the journal FS keeps changing the file system
and if the system doesn't crash, everything is fine: blocks get
On Monday 21 May 2001 10:14, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2001-05-19T16:25:47,
Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
How about:
# mkpart /dev/sda /dev/mypartition -o size=1024k,type=swap
# ls /dev/mypartition
base sizedevice type
# cat /dev/mypartition/size
24 matches
Mail list logo
