Re: SPNEGO questions

2005-11-02 Thread Andrew Bartlett
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 17:03 +0100, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Serassio Guido wrote: > > >> > Unable to open tdb '/usr/local/samba/private/secrets.ldb' > >> > Failed to connect to '/usr/local/samba/private/secrets.ldb' > >> > Could not open secrets.ldb > >> > >> This sounds stup

New version of squid filter patches

2005-11-02 Thread Rene Mayrhofer
Hi all, [Please CC me in replies, I am not subscribed to this mailing list.] I have finally come around to create a web page for my squid filter patches (an updated version of Olaf Titz's patches, as indicated by my last post http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-dev/200401/0062.html).

Re: Summary of Squid-2.6 opinions

2005-11-02 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Duane Wessels wrote: Looking at the current wishlist for 2.6 I think it is too long and too ambitious. I would rather that people spend time on squid-3, but that is perhaps a selfish reason. As indicated in my earlier message I have not been able to find customers willing

Re: Summary of Squid-2.6 opinions

2005-11-02 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Duane Wessels wrote: Looking at the current wishlist for 2.6 I think it is too long and too ambitious. I would rather that people spend time on squid-3, but that is perhaps a selfish reason. The 2.6 presented in the original "wishlist" in praktice already exists and getti

Re: Summary of Squid-2.6 opinions

2005-11-02 Thread Kinkie
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 09:40 -0700, Duane Wessels wrote: > As part of that work > we have promised spend time on making squid-3 stable. We still > intend to do that. Everyone does. > Looking at the current wishlist for 2.6 I think it is too long and > too ambitious. I would rather that people sp

Re: Summary of Squid-2.6 opinions

2005-11-02 Thread Duane Wessels
No answer yet: * Duane Wessels * Robert Collins I have mixed feelings about 2.6. On one hand I think "2.5" has lived too long and it looks bad that we have not incremented the stable branch number for years. But on the other hand I feel cheated because I remember being scolded for adding th

Re: Max simultaneous connections limit on per-destination basis

2005-11-02 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Radu Rendec wrote: Usage scenario: squid set up as httpd accelerator, with many virtual hosts on the accelerated servers. If the number of simultaneous connections is limited in the httpd servers and many simultaneous requests come to squid, it will end up filling its fd tabl

Re: SPNEGO questions

2005-11-02 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Serassio Guido wrote: > Unable to open tdb '/usr/local/samba/private/secrets.ldb' > Failed to connect to '/usr/local/samba/private/secrets.ldb' > Could not open secrets.ldb This sounds stupid, but you will need to either run Squid as root, or give world access to secrets.ldb

Re: Summary of Squid-2.6 opinions

2005-11-02 Thread Henrik Nordstrom
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Evgeny Kotsuba wrote: On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:05:51 +0100 (CET) Henrik Nordstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Summary of the opinions regarding a Squid-2.6 release brr... I can't understand, is it in "release" state now, or "just defrosted" ? A substantial proportio

Max simultaneous connections limit on per-destination basis

2005-11-02 Thread Radu Rendec
Hi, I'm trying to develop a new feature in squid. It should provide the ability to limit the number of simultaneous http requests based on the destination of the requests. Usage scenario: squid set up as httpd accelerator, with many virtual hosts on the accelerated servers. If the number of simul

Re: SPNEGO questions

2005-11-02 Thread Serassio Guido
Hi Andrew, At 23.06 01/11/2005, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > I can confirm to you that the SPN problem is fixed, the Samba 4 > machine was joined fine to the domain, and now I am able to see the > list of the shares from a Windows 2000 machine, but I cannot connect > to any share. There is something

Re: A question....

2005-11-02 Thread Tsantilas Christos
Hi, Please ignore this stupid question. Was made while I was under panic :-( > Hi all, > > I have a question about clientHttpRequest structure. > It has the field "clientHttpRequest *next". > Where the hell used this field? > ... > What am I loosing here? Everything Sory, Chr