Quoting Michael Lueck ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Further testing transferring large numbers of files works flawlessly, as
> expected.
>
> Thanks for the .deb's, we will run on your version for now. For some reason
> when I compiled the patch in I arrived at a 7MBish smbd whereas you ended up
> with ro
Further testing transferring large numbers of files works flawlessly, as
expected.
Thanks for the .deb's, we will run on your version for now. For some reason
when I compiled the patch in I arrived at a 7MBish smbd whereas you ended up
with roughly the same smbd size, thus I trust yours more.
Mic
tags 309003 patch
thanks
Quoting Michael Lueck ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I have downloaded and installed:
>
> samba-common_3.0.14a-2_i386.deb
> samba_3.0.14a-2_i386.deb
>
> The problem is resolved in this version. That is as much as I have tested at
> this time. I will be doing some major file tran
I have downloaded and installed:
samba-common_3.0.14a-2_i386.deb
samba_3.0.14a-2_i386.deb
The problem is resolved in this version. That is as much as I have tested at
this time. I will be doing some major file transfers against the new code and
report after that.
At this time we do not use the o
OK, Michael, I finally compiled new packages for samba, with the
upstream patch you mentioned in your bug report.
Could you please download packages from
http://www.perrier.eu.org/debian/packages/samba-3.0.14a+309003/
Be patient : my uplink is 384kb so the transfer may be quite slow.
I'm building a samba package with the upstream patch applied.
Hopefully, I'll be able to provide supposedly fixed packages so that
the samba package maintainers can decide whether it's worth fixing
this for sarge.
Michael, I suppose you'll be able to test the fixed packages?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
On Sat, 14 May 2005 18:08:32 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
>Michael, I suppose you'll be able to test the fixed packages?
Always happy to test a .deb package. I have a 100% reproducible test for this
bug.
Michael Lueck
Lueck Data Systems
http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Sat, 14 May 2005 07:21:53 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
>Please keep the bug number CC'ed to answers.
I considered it chatter / clarification not worthy of taking space in
bugs.debian.org
>Please note, besides this, that using XFS on testing, if you use it
>along with 2.6 kernels, is not a
Quoting Michael Lueck ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Fri, 13 May 2005 22:47:03 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
>
> >Which does not make the bug release critical
>
> In the end it is your call. What, since it involves Samba + XFS it is OK to
> allow a copy forever loop into stable? Since we run all
severity 309003 important
thanks
Quoting Michael Lueck ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Package: samba
> Version: 3.0.14a-1
> Severity: serious
>
> Thanks for getting Samba in Debian up to the 3.0.14 level. Sadly there was a
> bug introduced between 3.0.11 and 3.0.14.
>
> https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_b
Package: samba
Version: 3.0.14a-1
Severity: serious
Thanks for getting Samba in Debian up to the 3.0.14 level. Sadly there was a
bug introduced between 3.0.11 and 3.0.14.
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2622
Samba developers have a patch for this problem, I have compiled it and it
res
11 matches
Mail list logo