I can remember when I was younger (dare I mention the name a Microsoft product)
doing something similar with QBasic.
Jamie
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
-Original Message-
From: Rainer Kluge
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:00:56
To:
Subject: Re: Hmm...
Tzafrir Cohen
Tzafrir Cohen schrieb:
> Also, a perl one-liner for you:
perl -MPOSIX -e 'print POSIX::strftime("year of %F: is it %Y or
%G?\n", 0, 0, 0, 31, 11, 108)'
So what? It just tells us that, from an ISO standard point of view, the
current week is week 01 of 2009. replace 31 by 29 and you'll get the
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 11:00:59PM -0600, Kent West wrote:
> Chris Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 07:49:29PM EST, jatos.softw...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> You know, I would have expected the debian lists 2 be dead at this
> >> time of year.
> >>
> >
> >
> >> IMO, anyone posting
Chris Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 07:49:29PM EST, jatos.softw...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> You know, I would have expected the debian lists 2 be dead at this
>> time of year.
>>
>
>
>> IMO, anyone posting on the lists at this time is a serious geek and
>> yes, I know that would in
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 08:35:59PM EST, ghe wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Chris Jones wrote:
>
> > No just so drunk I had to take a break from that boring party..!!
>
> But can still type well -- that's a significant geek :-)
:-)
sober version:
No, just so drun
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 08:04:52PM EST, lostson wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 20:02 -0500, Daryl Styrk wrote:
> > > Jamie
> > > Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> >
> >
> > You wouldn't be telling a fib would you? BlackBerry from the party?
> >
> >
> Personally I wouldnt have it any o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Jones wrote:
> No just so drunk I had to take a break from that boring party..!!
But can still type well -- that's a significant geek :-)
- --
Glenn English
g...@slsware.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 08:02:59PM EST, Daryl Styrk wrote:
>
> > Jamie
> > Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>
>
> You wouldn't be telling a fib would you? BlackBerry from the party?
Took the words outa my mouth ..
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 07:49:29PM EST, jatos.softw...@gmail.com wrote:
> You know, I would have expected the debian lists 2 be dead at this
> time of year.
> IMO, anyone posting on the lists at this time is a serious geek and
> yes, I know that would include me ;)
No just so drunk I had to take
On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 20:02 -0500, Daryl Styrk wrote:
> > Jamie
> > Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>
>
> You wouldn't be telling a fib would you? BlackBerry from the party?
>
>
Personally I wouldnt have it any other way. Bars are always too crowded
a nice New Years at home with my wi
> Jamie
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
You wouldn't be telling a fib would you? BlackBerry from the party?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
on Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 05:36:48PM +0100, Christian Schnobrich ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 14:49, smurfd wrote:
>
> > Have a little faith in the debian folks!
> > I sure do!
> > What i dont trust, is some one claiming such thi
On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 14:49, smurfd wrote:
> Have a little faith in the debian folks!
> I sure do!
> What i dont trust, is some one claiming such things, and not having a
> @debian.org mailadress :)
Me too.
On top of that, I won't trust any email in this matter (as I don't know
how to check the
** On May 17, Mark Brown scribbled:
> On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 07:59:01PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] canonicalised to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I use postfix and I suppose it does the same. In the situation where the
>
> It does.
>
> > lookup fails I suppose postfix appended
On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 07:59:01PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] canonicalised to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I use postfix and I suppose it does the same. In the situation where the
It does.
> lookup fails I suppose postfix appended my domain name even though the host
> with such deri
** On May 17, brian moore scribbled:
> On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 06:33:04PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
> > Hi *,
> >
> > Take a look at the message below. I have just received it from the
> > debian-user list. There would be nothing strange in it if not for the fact
> > that the person who post
On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 06:33:04PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> Take a look at the message below. I have just received it from the
> debian-user list. There would be nothing strange in it if not for the fact
> that the person who posted it (apparently from the wcom.com domain as see
On: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:58:51 -0400 (EDT) Darxus writes:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-get upgrade
> Updating package status cache...done
> Checking system integrity...ok
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
> tetex-bin
> The following packages have been kept back
> xscreensaver-gl siag
>
On Sun, 5 Jul 1998, Paul Miller wrote:
>
> I have 1 static IP and I'm thinking about getting an additional dynamic
> IP. I'm not exactly sure on how DHCP works, but is there a way to have
> the my DNS server (on static IP) updated when the dynamic IP changes?
>
> THanks
> -Paul
If you are want
The IP changes every 24 hours. hmm.. If the two hosts were in the same
domain, it shouldn't make a difference (except for secondary servers),
right?
My interest in doing this is that my ISP only charges additional baudwidth
for static IPs... so, I could have a large site on a dynamic IP and a
s
How dynamic is the ip? What I'm getting at is that it takes time to have a
hostname propogate through the internet (sometimes up to a week). So if you get
this working, and if you're changing ip's every day then some computers on the
other side of the world may still point to an ip that has alread
On Sun, 5 Jul 1998, George Bonser wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jul 1998, Paul Miller wrote:
>
> >
> > I have 1 static IP and I'm thinking about getting an additional dynamic
> > IP. I'm not exactly sure on how DHCP works, but is there a way to have
> > the my DNS server (on static IP) updated when the dy
although i have not implemented it myself it is stock with the latest
version of dns and bind for unix. regards, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 05:52 AM 7/5/98 -0400, Paul Miller wrote:
>
>I have 1 static IP and I'm thinking about getting an additional dynamic
>IP. I'm not exactly sure on how DHCP works,
Paul Miller wrote:
> I have 1 static IP and I'm thinking about getting an additional dynamic
> IP. I'm not exactly sure on how DHCP works, but is there a way to have
> the my DNS server (on static IP) updated when the dynamic IP changes?
BIND 8.* introduces a dynamic update feature, which allow
have two sets of DNS files, named blah.org, and blah.dhcp, create links to them
with the real names, (named.hosts -> named.hosts.org). have your call dhcp
with a script that removes the links, and links them to the appropriate files
and restarts named (ndc restart).
That's one way I suppose...
-
Doing "domain" authentication is easy. First you need to know what share
constitutes your home directory ('smbclient -L' will list shares on a given
machine). Then you can use smbmount (as root) or smbclient (works like tar,
you can run it as yourself) to access the share--just specify the user (wi
26 matches
Mail list logo
