On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:24:47 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:03:53 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > now that jails are started in the background (which is good, to
>
> I just realized yesterday that it also stops in parallel (in the
> background).
Quoting Remko Lodder (from Mon, 25 Jan 2010
07:44:10 +0100):
Note that I haven't tsted it, but I don't see any errors in the patch.
---snip---
--
Simon L. Nielsen
Snipping a whole lot of data...
Thanks Simon, I will try to get to that as soon as possible, Alexander:
please feel
> Note that I haven't tsted it, but I don't see any errors in the patch.
>
>> ---snip---
> --
> Simon L. Nielsen
>
Snipping a whole lot of data...
Thanks Simon, I will try to get to that as soon as possible, Alexander:
please feel free to do it earlier if possible, my internet access is
"limit
B0;251;0cOn 2010.01.14 13:35:16 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> Quoting Remko Lodder (from Tue, 5 Jan 2010
> 11:35:48 +0100):
>
> > On Tue, January 5, 2010 11:24 am, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> >> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:03:53 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
Quoting Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> (from Tue, 05 Jan 2010
11:45:34 +0100):
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:03:53 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
wrote:
Hi,
now that jails are started in the background (which is good, to
I just realized yest
Quoting Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> (from Tue, 05 Jan 2010
11:45:34 +0100):
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:03:53 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
wrote:
Hi,
now that jails are started in the background (which is good, to
I just realized yesterday that it also stops
Quoting Remko Lodder (from Tue, 5 Jan 2010
11:35:48 +0100):
On Tue, January 5, 2010 11:24 am, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:03:53 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
wrote:
Hi,
now that jails are started in the background (which is good, to
I just realized yesterday that it
On 1/5/10 5:35 AM, Remko Lodder wrote:
My first reaction is to only allow to start in the background, but
everything else needs to be serialized.
i second that 'start in parallel', stop in serial, however, even with
stop in serial, if I have 64 jails, even in a fast, quad/quad co
On Tue, January 5, 2010 11:24 am, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:03:53 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> now that jails are started in the background (which is good, to
>
> I just realized yesterday that it also stops in parallel (in the
> background). This is
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:03:53 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
wrote:
Hi,
now that jails are started in the background (which is good, to
I just realized yesterday that it also stops in parallel (in the
background). This is bad. It may be the case that a jail is not full
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:03:53 +0100 Alexander Leidinger
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> now that jails are started in the background (which is good, to
I just realized yesterday that it also stops in parallel (in the
background). This is bad. It may be the case that a jail is not fully
stopped via the rc scrip
Hi,
now that jails are started in the background (which is good, to
prevent that a broken jail causes a good jail not to start), I have to
problem how to express dependencies.
Scenario:
- several jails on the same machine (via ezjail)
- one jail depends on the services of another jail, e.
12 matches
Mail list logo