Mhr wrote on Thu, 9 Oct 2008 13:43:36 -0700:
> It has to be
Doesn't really matter why ;-)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://li
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Then you just add it. Believe it or not but the Windows Explorer (at least
> in XP, it lost some of this in Vista) is much more customizable than Gnome
> or KDE.
>
It has to be - it runs on a system that was cobbled togeth
Guy Boisvert wrote on Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:39:32 -0400:
> The one i have here won't do that!
Then you just add it. Believe it or not but the Windows Explorer (at least
in XP, it lost some of this in Vista) is much more customizable than Gnome
or KDE.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get yo
Alexander Georgiev wrote:
2008/10/9 Guy Boisvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
XP Home don't have:
- The RDP server
- Offline Folders
- Dual CPU Support
- Greater Access Control (shares, files & folders)
- Multi-Language interface
Another annoyance is the lack of "address bar"
Alexander Georgiev wrote:
It does have "address bar". At least my copy of Windows XP Home has it.
Regarding Dual CPU Support - "Windows Task Manager" shows 2 separate
CPU Usage Histories for the CPU, which is Core3 CPU T7200. It has
hyperthreading or something.
"Home" supports a single multi
2008/10/9 Guy Boisvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Joseph L. Casale wrote:
>
> XP Home don't have:
>
> - The RDP server
> - Offline Folders
> - Dual CPU Support
> - Greater Access Control (shares, files & folders)
> - Multi-Language interface
>
>
> Another annoyance is the lack of "address bar" in the W
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
XP Home was purposefully "crippled" by MS so it lacks networking features
in XP Pro and Win2k Pro.
Yawn...
Are you informed well enough to know how it was "crippled" as you say?
I think not, it may not be a member of a Windows domain. That's it.
It costs less. That's fai
>XP Home was purposefully "crippled" by MS so it lacks networking features
>in XP Pro and Win2k Pro.
Yawn...
Are you informed well enough to know how it was "crippled" as you say?
I think not, it may not be a member of a Windows domain. That's it.
It costs less. That's fair?
I wonder if you apply
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> More than the 25MB(!) of documentation which are in the
> samba packages we release?
>
Yes the Enterprise Samba Docs are more than 28 Mb but are
raw in that they refer to Samba 3.2.x as well as having links
not working and charset specified in some files and unspecified
John wrote:
> Check out the tcp nodelay samba option in smb.conf.
>
I have the following in my smb.conf
# Most people will find that this option gives better performance.
# See speed.txt and the manual pages for details
socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192
Actually it
JohnStanley Writes:
Check out the tcp nodelay samba option in smb.conf.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Rob Townley wrote:
> You may want to look at a third party samba packager for better
> documentation such as:
> http://enterprisesamba.org/
More than the 25MB(!) of documentation which are in the samba packages
we release?
Ralph
pgpkktOwX3s2m.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_
Rob Townley wrote:
> You may want to look at a third party samba packager for
> better documentation such as: http://enterprisesamba.org/
My 3.0.32 is from the enterprise samba and coincidentally the
html charset problem (mentioned separately) is from viewing
the enterprise docs.
Someone menti
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:40 PM, John R Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Spike Turner wrote:
>
>> I've looked at the CentOS docs-list as well as the Wiki as I was
>> interested in Samba.
>>
>> On one CentOS box I've got 3.0.32 (the latest bug-fixed version from
>> Samba.org)
>> and on another I'
Spike Turner wrote:
I've looked at the CentOS docs-list as well as the Wiki as I was interested
in Samba.
On one CentOS box I've got 3.0.32 (the latest bug-fixed version from Samba.org)
and on another I've got 3.0.28 (the latest from upstream). The docs look almost
the same and the docs refer
I've looked at the CentOS docs-list as well as the Wiki as I was interested
in Samba.
On one CentOS box I've got 3.0.32 (the latest bug-fixed version from Samba.org)
and on another I've got 3.0.28 (the latest from upstream). The docs look almost
the same and the docs refer to security = share. H
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Spike Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've looked at the CentOS docs-list as well as the Wiki as I was interested
> in Samba.
> Is there a plan for a quick and dirty guide on the Wiki for setting up Samba
> with secure settings as well as TDB rather than depreca
I've looked at the CentOS docs-list as well as the Wiki as I was interested
in Samba.
On one CentOS box I've got 3.0.32 (the latest bug-fixed version from Samba.org)
and on another I've got 3.0.28 (the latest from upstream). The docs look almost
the same and the docs refer to security = share. How
18 matches
Mail list logo
