Bug#545883: 686 version of memcached

2009-09-24 Thread azhrarn
'm more > than sure than almost none is using memcached seriously with x86 kernels, but > amd64 ones. -- ICQ: 116080581 | Jabber: azhr...@underhanded.org AIM/Y!: AzhrarnLOD | IRC: Azhrarn @ irc.chatspike.net ( Vim, Tabs, BSD Braces, Debian, and Perl ) signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#545883: 686 version of memcached

2009-09-18 Thread azhrarn
Thanks for the quick updates, is there an i686 version on the way as well? signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#492754: bind9: setsockopt(45, IPV6_RECVPKTINFO) failed: Protocol not available

2008-07-28 Thread azhrarn
uery-cache { localnets; localhost; 216.0.0.0/16; 12.0.0.94; }; listen-on {216.0.0.216; 216.0.0.222; 216.0.0.206; 192.0.0.105; 127.0.0.1; }; -- ICQ: 116080581 | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM/Y!: AzhrarnLOD | IRC: Azhrarn @ irc.chatspike.net ( Vim, Tabs, BSD Braces, Debian, and Perl ) signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#480210: apache2-mpm-prefork: Stale child threads not serving requests or timing out

2008-06-06 Thread azhrarn
ain though. We are using php5 and mysql5 as well, so it is possibly related in some other manner. -- ICQ: 116080581 | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM/Y!: AzhrarnLOD | IRC: Azhrarn @ irc.chatspike.net ( Vim, Tabs, BSD Braces, Debian, and Perl ) signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#480210: apache2-mpm-prefork: Stale child threads not serving requests or timing out

2008-05-08 Thread azhrarn
... > (gdb) quit > > > > Uninstall the packages again. Thanks for the quick response, I'm unable to reproduce it myself reliably, so waiting for it to happen again. I'll provide the backtrace as soon as it does. -- ICQ: 116080581 | Jabber:

Bug#319745: acknowledged by developer (those values are in a sub-table)

2005-10-20 Thread azhrarn
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 02:20:25PM -0400, Charles Fry wrote: > Bug reopened and feature request forwarded upstream. Thanks for the > feedback. Cool, thanks ;) signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#319745: acknowledged by developer (those values are in a sub-table)

2005-10-20 Thread azhrarn
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 01:33:27PM -0700, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > Actually, the behavior that you describe is intentional. This is > evidenced by the fact that the columns that you mention are created by > sub-tables inside of a single cell, and thus weren't intended to > populate the c