On 10/07/13 01:11, Dick William Thomas wrote:
On 09/07/13 23:49, MRH wrote:
For years I've been using self-build kernels (from kernel.org) for this
or that reason. Recently I decided to use debian stock kernel instead.
Should be so much easier and faster. Well, it did not work.
I have installed
For years I've been using self-build kernels (from kernel.org) for this
or that reason. Recently I decided to use debian stock kernel instead.
Should be so much easier and faster. Well, it did not work.
I have installed
linux-headers-3.9-1-amd64
linux-image-3.9-1-amd64
(I run amd64, debian whee
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 01:35:53PM +0100, Daniel Tryba wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> [snip]
> > Does this seem like a workable/wise plan or here there be dragons? Is
> > there any reason to think that 20 GB is too small for a fully installed
> > workstat
On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
[snip]
> Does this seem like a workable/wise plan or here there be dragons? Is
> there any reason to think that 20 GB is too small for a fully installed
> workstation including swap and /tmp (everything but /home)?
Sounds sane, except
On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 06:20:31PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 09:13:51PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 05:52:08PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Th
On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 09:13:51PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 05:52:08PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> > >
> > > Then LVs for everything including swap.
> >
> > my genuine curiousity question is
On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 05:52:08PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
> >
> > Then LVs for everything including swap.
>
> my genuine curiousity question is why you would bother to put swap on raid? I
> suppose if you had a lot of s
On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote:
>
> Then LVs for everything including swap.
my genuine curiousity question is why you would bother to put swap on raid? I
suppose if you had a lot of swapping going on and a drive failed, it
could be catastrophic, but that's the only
I'm going to be reinstalling my amd64 using Etch RC1 in an effort to
track down bug 402157 re grub not installing.
This gives me the opportunity to rearrange how the drives are set up.
I have two Seagate Barracuda 80 GB SATA-3.0 drives.
Right now (running amd64 Etch pre RC1), I have both drives
9 matches
Mail list logo
