On 03/29/2016 03:27 AM, Ajay Garg wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> Surprisingly, I could not find this on google :-\
>
> We are trying to use vanilla POSIX-socket-APIs, but we are unable to
> connect if the URL is on the other side of the proxy.
> Is there a socket-option wherein this would be allowed?
>
>
On 03/29/2016 03:27 AM, Ajay Garg wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> Surprisingly, I could not find this on google :-\
>
> We are trying to use vanilla POSIX-socket-APIs, but we are unable to
> connect if the URL is on the other side of the proxy.
> Is there a socket-option wherein this would be allowed?
>
>
On 02/05/2016 08:09 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> Ah, you have versioned modules / builds enabled, that's what caused the
> rebuild, if you disable CONFIG_MODVERSIONS and
> CONFIG_MODULE_SRCVERSION_ALL you shouldn't rebuild everything.
>
> If those options are disabled, then something really
On 02/05/2016 05:29 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 04:48:52PM -0500, Phil Turmel wrote:
>> I'm stumped as to how that powerpc patch can affect my x86 laptop, an
>> HP ZBook 17 w/ i7 processor & nouveau graphics, but it certainly
>> does. Th
On 02/05/2016 05:29 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 04:48:52PM -0500, Phil Turmel wrote:
>> I'm stumped as to how that powerpc patch can affect my x86 laptop, an
>> HP ZBook 17 w/ i7 processor & nouveau graphics, but it certainly
>> does. Th
On 02/05/2016 08:09 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> Ah, you have versioned modules / builds enabled, that's what caused the
> rebuild, if you disable CONFIG_MODVERSIONS and
> CONFIG_MODULE_SRCVERSION_ALL you shouldn't rebuild everything.
>
> If those options are disabled, then something really
ng excellent support. I'd particularly like to
> high-light Phil Turmel who is very forthcoming with excellent advice,
> but he is certainly not the only one who deserves a lot of thanks.
> So "Thank you" to everyone who answers questions on linux-raid.
You are very welcome
ng excellent support. I'd particularly like to
> high-light Phil Turmel who is very forthcoming with excellent advice,
> but he is certainly not the only one who deserves a lot of thanks.
> So "Thank you" to everyone who answers questions on linux-raid.
You are very welcome
On 01/06/2014 04:31 AM, Andrea Mazzoleni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a port to the Linux kernel of a RAID engine that I'm currently using
> in a hobby project called SnapRAID. This engine supports up to six parities
> levels and at the same time maintains compatibility with the existing Linux
>
On 01/06/2014 04:31 AM, Andrea Mazzoleni wrote:
Hi,
This is a port to the Linux kernel of a RAID engine that I'm currently using
in a hobby project called SnapRAID. This engine supports up to six parities
levels and at the same time maintains compatibility with the existing Linux
RAID6 one.
On 01/03/2014 05:07 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Eric Appleman wrote:
>> Wasn't the whole idea of a fee being permitted an acknowledgment that
>> physical distribution of source was acceptable if electronic was not
>> possible (low bandwidth ISP, security
On 01/03/2014 05:07 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Eric Appleman erapple...@gmail.com wrote:
Wasn't the whole idea of a fee being permitted an acknowledgment that
physical distribution of source was acceptable if electronic was not
possible (low bandwidth ISP,
On 05/19/2013 06:57 AM, luke.leighton wrote:
> On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Ian Stirling wrote:
>> On 18.05.2013 19:27, luke.leighton wrote:
>>
>>> question: what is the procedure for having that licensing explicitly
>>> added to the linux kernel sources?
[snip license compatibility
On 05/19/2013 06:57 AM, luke.leighton wrote:
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Ian Stirling gpl...@mauve.plus.com wrote:
On 18.05.2013 19:27, luke.leighton wrote:
question: what is the procedure for having that licensing explicitly
added to the linux kernel sources?
[snip license
On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
> [trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is broken. You've received
multiple dissertations on why it is going to stay that way. Unless you
fix it yourself, and everyone seems to be
On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
[trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is broken. You've received
multiple dissertations on why it is going to stay that way. Unless you
fix it yourself, and everyone seems to be
On 12/13/2012 04:32 AM, Eric Wong wrote:
> Andreas Voellmy wrote:
[trim /]
>>> Another thread, distinct from all of the threads serving particular
>>> sockets, is perfoming epoll_wait calls. When sockets are returned as
>>> being ready from an epoll_wait call, the thread signals to the
>>>
On 12/13/2012 07:08 PM, Phil Turmel wrote:
> On 12/13/2012 04:32 AM, Eric Wong wrote:
>> Andreas Voellmy wrote:
>
> [trim /]
>
>>>> Another thread, distinct from all of the threads serving particular
>>>> sockets, is perfoming epoll_wait calls. When soc
On 12/13/2012 07:08 PM, Phil Turmel wrote:
On 12/13/2012 04:32 AM, Eric Wong wrote:
Andreas Voellmy andreas.voel...@yale.edu wrote:
[trim /]
Another thread, distinct from all of the threads serving particular
sockets, is perfoming epoll_wait calls. When sockets are returned as
being
On 12/13/2012 04:32 AM, Eric Wong wrote:
Andreas Voellmy andreas.voel...@yale.edu wrote:
[trim /]
Another thread, distinct from all of the threads serving particular
sockets, is perfoming epoll_wait calls. When sockets are returned as
being ready from an epoll_wait call, the thread signals
On 09/11/2012 12:54 AM, wei_w...@realsil.com.cn wrote:
> From: Wei WANG
>
> Support for Realtek PCI-Express driver-based card readers including rts5209
> and rts5229.
>
> v2:
> 1. Using platform device to replace realtek slot bus
>
> v3:
> 1. Fix a bug that DMA out of SW-IOMMU space in Lenovo
On 09/11/2012 12:54 AM, wei_w...@realsil.com.cn wrote:
From: Wei WANG wei_w...@realsil.com.cn
Support for Realtek PCI-Express driver-based card readers including rts5209
and rts5229.
v2:
1. Using platform device to replace realtek slot bus
v3:
1. Fix a bug that DMA out of SW-IOMMU
[Added linux-raid to the CC]
Hi Kevin,
Notes interleaved:
On 07/25/2012 06:52 PM, Kevin Ross wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm having a problem. After a while, my software RAID rebuild becomes
> extremely slow, and the filesystem on the RAID is essentially blocked.
> I don't know what is causing this.
[Added linux-raid to the CC]
Hi Kevin,
Notes interleaved:
On 07/25/2012 06:52 PM, Kevin Ross wrote:
Hello,
I'm having a problem. After a while, my software RAID rebuild becomes
extremely slow, and the filesystem on the RAID is essentially blocked.
I don't know what is causing this. I
James wrote:
[snip /]
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 08:49:15AM -0500, James wrote:
I've tried a few cautions things to bring the array back up with the three
good drives with no luck.
[snip /]
mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --assume-clean --level=raid5 --raid-devices=4
--spare-devices=0
James wrote:
[snip /]
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 08:49:15AM -0500, James wrote:
I've tried a few cautions things to bring the array back up with the three
good drives with no luck.
[snip /]
mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --assume-clean --level=raid5 --raid-devices=4
--spare-devices=0
26 matches
Mail list logo
