On 02/11/13 12:17, Stuart Cassoff wrote:
On 02/11/13 05:11, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2013/02/10 21:11, Stuart Cassoff wrote:
Is it too late for this to go in?
We don't have a proper working diff, Thunderbird mangled the one you
sent (stripped trailing spaces on lines in the manpage diff)
an
Is there going to be a chance to update OTR to 4.0 and possibly update
Pidgin before ports are completely locked?
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 04:45:39PM -0500, Jiri B wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've seen a lot of logging of Tor:
>
> Feb 6 22:29:25 host Tor[27874]: We weren't able to find support for
> all of the TLS ciphersuites that we wanted to advertise. This won't
> hurt security, but it might make your Tor (if run as
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 07:59:05PM +0100, Matthias Kilian wrote:
> gdevcups.c: offsetof(gx_device, icc_struct) = 500
> gdevcups.c: sizeof(gx_color_index) = 4
> gsicc_manage.c: offsetof(gx_device, icc_struct) = 640
> gsicc_manage.c: sizeof(gx_color_index) = 8
>
> This looks like some #include and/o
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 04:14:06PM +, Martin Crossley wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 03:47:25PM +0100, Matthias Kilian wrote:
> > There's some more debugging output, but the above two bits matter.
> > They produce the following output:
> >
> > DEBUG2: (2) pdev = 0x80a26034, pdev->icc_struct
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:56:19PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> BTW if you don't use sa_compile, using that can reduce load with spamassassin
> a bit..
Thanks Stuart! I'll definately give that a try. The server has been up
continuously since early 2009, so I will have to read back on my notes
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 03:47:25PM +0100, Matthias Kilian wrote:
> There's some more debugging output, but the above two bits matter.
> They produce the following output:
>
> DEBUG2: (2) pdev = 0x80a26034, pdev->icc_struct = 0x8450b098
> DEBUG2: gsicc_set_device_profile: (0) pdev = 0x80a26034, pde
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 01:48:16PM +, Martin Crossley wrote:
> > i'm really curious why it doesn't happen on amd64 and wether it
> > only happens on 32bit archs
>
> I wonder if this recent post on bugs.ghostscript.com could be
> related: http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693612
> "In
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 09:17:45PM +0100, Matthias Killian wrote:
> While getting bleeding eyes reading ghostscript code and getting
> closer to the problem
Ouch! that bad?
> i'm really curious why it doesn't happen on amd64 and wether it
> only happens on 32bit archs
I wonder if this recent pos
