On Fri, 2021-02-26 at 13:53 -0400, George N. White III wrote:
> At some point, RFC's need to address error reporting and diagnostics.
> There is also Java, which spews out 10^2 lines of tracing data with
> nothing to highlight the line that has the key to the problem.
>
> I suspect the compiler
Substring search indexes are based on trigraphs aka combinations of three
letters. So for example, "search" would be broken down to:
"sea"
"ear"
"arc"
"rch"
This is because 1 and 2 letter indexes were considered "too costly" to maintain
when these were originally added.
> On 27 Feb 2021, at
I am curious what the similarities are between Fedora 33 and the newly
released Mageia 8, and what the differences are.
Today's release announcment of Mageia 8, alleges that it ships with three
repositories, one of which is disabled. One of their repos contains
non-free stuff, and can be
Why is a one letter wildcard search not hitting the index?...yet if you add
two or more letters to the wildcard, the index is used. Yes cn does have 3
indexes on it.
Example
26/Feb/2021:16:33:51.189998029 -0600] - NOTICE - ldbm_back_search -
Unindexed search: search
I created a Fedora FAS account a long while back. I cannot find the
account name I used and there seems to be no way to find it. The password
reset assumes you know what account name you used.
Who do I talk to to get this fixed?
---
Q: Why do programmers confuse Halloween and Christmas?
A:
On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 at 10:43, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 08:33:54 -0600
> Ian Pilcher wrote:
>
> > I stand by my position that NFS mount errors are almost sadistically
> > useless.
>
> Not enough scope. Almost all linux errors are sadistically useless :-).
>
At some point, RFC's
On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 08:33:54 -0600
Ian Pilcher wrote:
> I stand by my position that NFS mount errors are almost sadistically
> useless.
Not enough scope. Almost all linux errors are sadistically useless :-).
___
users mailing list --
On 2/26/21 8:20 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
172.31.248.0(rw,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash,insecure)
^
|
/24
Aargh! I wasted a couple of hours on this last night. Amazing how
seeing something in a different context enables one to spot the error.
I stand
Is there an RFC somewhere that requires NFS errors to be completely
opaque?
* 2 Fedora 33 systems on the same subnet (172.31.248.0/24).
* NFS client is 172.31.248.2; NFS server is 172.31.248.3
* /etc/exports on server contains
/srv/upscale_data
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:18:42PM -0600, D wrote:
>
> Thanks,
You should probably check out the archives of the fedora-arm list:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/a...@lists.fedoraproject.org/
You'll get the most up to date info from that list.
FWIW, I'm currently running Fedora
We are testing scenarios with Multi Master Replication (MMR) with many
replicas. We need to gather experience in this area.
The current scenario is a star topology with one central server with
replication agreements with all others, and the others only with the central
server. It is scaled up
On 26/02/2021 16:48, Jerome Lille wrote:
On Thu, 2021-02-25 at 13:19 -0400, George N. White III wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 at 12:46, Jerome Lille
wrote:
I tried to simply change type from nfs to nfs4 in the fstab in the
client. Unfortunately I then get the response
mount.nfs4: access denied
On Thu, 2021-02-25 at 13:19 -0400, George N. White III wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 at 12:46, Jerome Lille
> wrote:
> > I tried to simply change type from nfs to nfs4 in the fstab in the
> > client. Unfortunately I then get the response
> >
> > mount.nfs4: access denied by server while mounting
13 matches
Mail list logo
