to imply that you requested a new upstream version, just that
the bug has now been fixed in the upstream release.
Personally, I will list multiple bugs in the new upstream release line
in my changelog, if they are actually fixed.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
no
problem understanding the paragraph I wrote above.
[Bastian, take it easy, it is just a joke :-)]
Since in most (every?) country, a corporation or business entity is
considered a legal person, he may very well have been referring to
something like that.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http
for some reason you don't depend on it (e.g., the user may
actually want to install the front end without the engine) you needn't
mention it in the description.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpYmRoqdEMt7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
an
alternative to xmessage.
Is there a way to not allow changelog entries to automatically close
bugs assigned to other packages? This seems like it might require
modifying some infrastructure, but I am not sure what are the affected
components or what I can do to help.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C
) or (bug to be closed is an ITP)?
Or an ITA, O, or maybe any bug against wnpp or other pseudo packages as
was suggested elsewhere in this thread?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgp6zoopRPd6Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature
) and that I have no
knowledge of Perl (other than to be able to execute a Perl script).
grin
I will defer to those with the proper access and expertise.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpx8r8c419wX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
WindowMaker the only window manager in
Debian. Down with GNOME and KDE!
Does it show that I am a WindowMaker fan? :-)
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
much left
to do. I think the sky is literally the limit. I have tons of ideas,
here is just one:
[Snip story idea]
I dont see how this is related to Debian development. Did I miss a
memo, or something?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
own modules that are not
part of a package under the control of dpkg.
Anyhow, the warning is relatively harmless and can be safely ignored.
(I hope that all of this is correct. If I messed somethig up, someone
please let me know.)
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net
Janez Rabzelj Zappone wrote:
Hi, the project is dead?
I am using Debian on the desktop right now. Maybe you are confusing it
with one of the BSDs.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
is that this is generally a good idea, then I intend to
file a bug against bugs.debian.org to request the feature. Though,
looking at the list of bugs (and their ages) filed against
bugs.debian.org I would welcome any suggestions on how I can help to get
this implemented.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http
fake.
$ host 128.187.0.165
165.0.187.128.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer tmcb-u110-3N1E-CE2.byu.edu.
It must be SCO. They have cleverly disguised themselves as BYU
students. :-)
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
will occasionally
do something you did not mean to do.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frank Küster wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is true. But really, I thank that what happened shows a lack of common
sense. There is little helping that. Imagine that you take your car to
get serviced. The mechanic replaces some part. Next time you open the hood,
you
easier to setup and get running than bochs. The bochs
documentation leaves something to be desired where the qemu documentation
is clear and concise.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe
(for $699) a special browsing tool. I
give then a choice between synaptic (desktop users), aptitude (server
users), and dselect (masochists). :-)
Naturally, all of this is in jest. Just curious, why not just let them
view your packages through one of the above tools?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http
Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
I'm still running Woody on all my mirrors and I'd like to have my own,
local, repository of only (!) woody...
The page http://www.debian.org/mirror/ftpmirror doesn't describe this...
Look at the debmirror package. Works like a charm.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C
has enough experience with Debian to know the correct
list on which to ask a question:
http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
=308791
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Otavio Salvador wrote:
What's the current consensus right now?
IMHO, we should display every bug that still affect stable so we won't
receive duplicated reports so often.
What about oldstable while it is supported?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
/
Or, if you feel comfortable doing it, then upgrade to Etch or Sid.
Besides, is this not a bit OT for -devel? Perhaps this discussion is
more suited to -user.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
even debian-security-announce. I know that
there are many folks that participate in debian-user and watch the other
lists that are not also subscribed to debian-devel or debian-devel-announce.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
to something in /bin, it will still be
used. What is the default action when the user's shell is not available?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ISPs now block outbound port 25 (at least on
consumer-level service), except for what is relayed through their mail
servers.
I guess it is a bit of a catch-22.
What about modifying it to work through something like an http POST?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
consultant [0] to help the process
go smoother.
-Roberto
[0] http://www.debian.org/consultants/
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
be convinced by the ISP to use a mail client like Lookout, which is
pointed at the ISP's outbound mail server. Personally, I think it is a
responsible thing for mass market ISPs to do.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
is 1757) report themselves as being in devel or
libdevel. On the whole, I would say that is pretty good.
-ROberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
your
system to use it by default by following these steps.
That would probably help to eliminate much confusion.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
a while since I setup Postix in this manner, so I
forget whether it asks you on which addresses to listen. In any case,
if the default were 127.0.0.1 instead of 0.0.0.0, then even users
without a firewall would be in reasonably good shape.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net
cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
On Wednesday 17 May 2006 23:08, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Except that most customers don't know what a port is, nor much less care
that any are blocked (unless it prevents them from playing everquest or
chatting). Most people don't run their own mail servers
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[0] At least as far as those things have been previously known.
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
understand. I have spent quite a while
reading through the documentation and messing with it, but Arch seems to
me to not make any rational sense.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
) seems to be
a better arch. Still I couldn't be convinced to use it.
Disclaimer: I'm not a Subversion guru. So I might as well just be
ignorant.
Ditto.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
will be updated and uploaded.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Fabrice Lorrain wrote:
Hi Roberto.
Thanks a lot for the quick answer and your work on this package.
@+,
Fab
No problem.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
That is an interesting idea. Have you considered proposing it to the
upstream devs?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
not some sort of legal analyst or expert
I think this whole mess is rather absurd
Flame away
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
different reason).
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:45:11AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
- something it already had (admins who really wanted Sun's Java could
always go to java.sun.com and install it themselves or use java-package)
Come on; you could say this about almost _every
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:45:11AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Christian Perrier wrote:
And isn't another small cabal of freeness junkies, who cannot accept
that it is actually possible to work with commercial vendors to assist
them in their way to free software
to that package in the
coming weeks.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
it was orphaned and I
am using LTSP at my church. I am rather busy with some of the other
packaging efforts I have joined. So please, feel free. If you would
still like my help, I will let you know when I am ready to join in a few
weeks.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net
:-)
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
running on an UPS?
I have heard of people doing that sort of thing.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
manpage.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
no chroot
configured), while pbuilder creates a clean chroot environment based on
a tarball with the required files before beginning a build, which it
removes entirely afterwards.
Thanks for the further clarification.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
? That's absolutely great. Is there any sort of announcement of
this anywhere?
What about the far more important and pressing matter of a Reply to
List button in Thunderbird? Has that finally been resolved?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
the Debian directory under source control with svn-buildpackage.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
it under GPL or a free
version of the GFDL. Could you please clarify and also add it to the
document?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Frank Küster wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not sure if I missed it, but you seem to claim a copyright but not give
an explicit license. I imagine you meant to put it under GPL or a free
version of the GFDL. Could you please clarify and also add it to the
document
supported, but
I know I occasionally backport packages for my own use.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
call it renice*d*, please.
Agreed, the name makes me think that it is a daemon that monitors for
new processes starting up and *then* renices the processes based on the
provided regex.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: Digital
probably go for pop3d, httpd, inetd and so on.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
who supports dropping significant
zeros for no good reason.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:21:04AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:47:36 -0400]:
Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the
right of the decimal, making the zero significant.
Er, read Policy 5.6.12.
I have read it. I
are not our numbers. grin
I never said I was a mathematician :-)
The original comparison, though, was 0.09 and 0.9.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
?
* is there any advantage to avoiding the built-in?
* why the different implementations?
Incidentally, the script is a bash script.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
pgpwEvRbk8cHn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
, it seems logical (and warranted)
to bump the major version number to indicate the dramatic differences
between Sarge and (the to be released) Etch.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
pgpCfnl0moASN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I was reading the kill man page today looking for some information for a
script I am writing. The man page mentioned that some shells have a
kill built-in command. On further investigation, I noticed
be appreciated.
-Roberto
[0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/07/msg00040.html
[1] http://packages.debian.org/httperf
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
pgpg9SAiOq73D.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 07:56:55PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 01:33:14PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I posted this to debian-release yesterday, but have received no replies.
So you decided to post it to debian-devel? Seems odd to me...
but anyway, here my
On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 11:04:49PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I have been corresponding with the developer and maintainer of httperf
[0], which I intend to adopt. The issue was that a libssl linking
exception was needed for the package. They are currently
.
It is better to ask and be certain than to err and offend.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpVcjFwTvKkJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
of me have been in the queue is rather disheartening.
I plan to stick it out, but I am sure that there others who are not
willing to wait so long.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpVEcTrCRARp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpkeIO1cWqts.pgp
Description: PGP signature
with the CGI script. Most of my packages have
watch files and the version were being correctly reported until just
before the servers were relocated. I imagine that it may be related.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpH6gDsbEUUi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: ddccontrol
Version : 0.1.3
Upstream Author : Nicolas Boichat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://ddccontrol.sourceforge.net
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 03:52:16PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: ddccontrol
Version : 0.1.3
Upstream Author : Nicolas Boichat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http
psuedo
package? If so what is the appropriate severity?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpXw2duyClGN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 10:22:24PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Le Ven 12 Août 2005 22:18, Roberto C. Sanchez a écrit :
to wich /dev/??? entry does the program speaks to ? if it's video (e.g.)
then the normal user of a box is supposed to be in the video group, and
setuid is not required
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: ddccontrol-db
Version : 20050813
Upstream Author : Nicolas Boichat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://ddccontrol.sourceforge.net
people's packages. Option a is
likely doomed to fail since revision control tool choices are like a
choice of text editor or religion.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpkKeLDwA2pP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
:-)
Hint: this is not easy. There would need to be some sort of metric or
heuristic for deciding the importance of a package.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpkts7t5F1o9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I notice that the DEHS still can't process watch files. Any ideas on
why this is? Is it related to the master move?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpD3z9YJxmYp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
helping out.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpIYwxNyMqoK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
for the package I have placed on my website, and the pbuilder builds the
package and sends me the output. Is that what you mean? Maybe Anibal
can provide us all with the secret of his success? :-)
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpyr2ZkEP3Pi.pgp
Description
that there are far
better alternatives.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgp4bGCmYg6or.pgp
Description: PGP signature
stagnated. CVS is
broken and there are better alternatives. Please look into those.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpF1oik07cJ0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
are
non-free) and only implements SSH1, which is probably not a good thing
to use anyways.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpwOkdo4xomc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Sarge
went stable. I still use CVS occasionally since some projects to which
I contribute use CVS (e.g., on sourceforge).
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpVGR3CfOBiW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 03:55:56PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 12:25:07AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mindterm (#323802), orphaned today
Description: java ssh client that can be used as a web applet
(like smbldap-tools), to handle POSIX information
within accounts before adding Samba information.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpbfWVn0fZaw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-2.95 on my system becuase I
like it (or need it/whatever). If tried to build some of the bleeding
edge packages with it, it will likely fail. That does not make it RC
since Debian doesn't even ship 2.95 anymore as the default.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: gollem
Version : x.y.z
Upstream Author : Michael Slusarz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.horde.org/gollem/
* License
.
I am sure that there are other packages that fall into this category.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgp0uxf08rlzg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
that are
spam. Can that facility be configured so that if the format (package
name, version, etc) is not followed; the bug will not be emailed out
to the lists?
Not sure about that.
The problem is that being too restrictive on spam also means getting
more false positives.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C
, dcvs, superversion,
siveco, bky, ...
Visual Source Safe :-)
/ducks
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpIiGLs9MeBS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ignore it. I believe that the same would apply to your
package. If you are only linking to ligcrypt (regardless of the code's
ability to link to alternate implementations), it is main and so you are
OK.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpztQTuqKN02.pgp
[This is being cross-posted to d-d and d-u, adjust reply as needed]
I am wondering if any DDs or DUs are planning on attending the Ohio Linux
Fest 2005. It is October 1, in Columbus. I would like to see about
arranging a keysigning of some sort.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http
.
Seems like it would be neat to have.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpkCYCLFB310.pgp
Description: PGP signature
to 'sin'. This is
the same code run on Windows.
This list is concerned with development of Debian itself. Your question
is more appropriate for debian-user.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpaLSWKxtXUh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
extensions. Some users
will invariably complain to the Mozilla devs, and Debian looks kind of
stupid because of it.
There really has to be a better way.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpsS9v5vLaFS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 03:01:24PM +0100, Steve Kemp wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 09:25:22AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I am concerned that a version of Mozilla claiming to be an earlier will
eventually break user-installed extensions.
..
There really has to be a better
developer to make the symbols public and he did. No problem and much
cleaner than requiring the source of another package.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpOLIcywpdK5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I am not concerned about that. Thanks for any pointers.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgp7j2I7UfCk7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 01:17:54PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
Re: Roberto C. Sanchez in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I recently generated a new gpg key. I was planning on revoking my old
key, however all of my packages were uploaded with signatures from my
old key. Do I need to prepare new uploads
indicates a binary-only NMU.
Maybe Someone tried to do an NMU and it partially failed?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpnlTNb5IQp8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
pgpGCS0aJcltf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
been really shaken out of the system.
Agreed. Last night I was installing on some old hardware and I had a
hard drive go bad after the first reboot. The drive was on /dev/md1.
All three arrays (md0, md1, and md2) came up, with only md1 in a
degraded state.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http
1 - 100 of 1592 matches
Mail list logo
