We are experiencing some problems which I think *could* be related to
timeout problems with poll().
1) mysql-3.23.48 + FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE (also happens with prior mysql
releases)
CPU: Pentium III/Pentium III Xeon/Celeron (796.54-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x683
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 11:54:02AM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote:
> Dump should ideally be run on an unmounted filesystem. The next best
> is to create a snapshot ( /usr/src/sys/ufs/ffs/README.snapshot ) and
> dump that.
True.
But on systems that host e.g. mailservers or webservers its unacceptable
to
We use amanda and dump for backups. Some hosts have rather busy disks
even during non prime time hours when backup is run.
>From time to time amanda reports dump(8) errors like the following:
sendbackup: info end
| DUMP: Date of this level 5 dump: Wed Feb 6 01:53:12 2002
| DUMP: Date of las
This is FreeBSD 3.4
Hmmm ... I've thought files larger than 2 GB are supported since around
2.2.5.
Now I have a logfile of a apache server that is
-rw-rw-r-- 1 rootwheel 2412880509 Mar 23 22:05 access.http.23-01
If I do
$ less access.http.23-01
Cannot seek to that file positi
sts/freebsd/net\
/home/maex/Maildir/lists/freebsd/scsi \
/home/maex/Maildir/lists/freebsd/stable
# freebsd-scsi
folder-hook lists/freebsd/scsi \
'my_hdr From: "Markus Stumpf&
/home/maex/Maildir/lists/freebsd/scsi \
/home/maex/Maildir/lists/freebsd/stable
# freebsd-scsi
folder-hook lists/freebsd/scsi \
'my_hdr From: "Markus Stumpf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 11:42:58AM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> The numeric ID is not important. Neither is the name. So long as there's
> something that people maintaining ports can use. I've followed Solaris'
> lead on the choice of name, ``smtp''.
The numeric id IS important.
How do you think
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 11:42:58AM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> The numeric ID is not important. Neither is the name. So long as there's
> something that people maintaining ports can use. I've followed Solaris'
> lead on the choice of name, ``smtp''.
The numeric id IS important.
How do you think
On Wed, Sep 01, 1999 at 03:56:10PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
> If we do this, I hope a more obvious name is chosen; something like
> "mailman" might be a start. Or "mailperson", or "postperson", or
> whatever. "mta" just feels a little obscure.
May I vote for NO more predefined uids/gids at all
On Wed, Sep 01, 1999 at 03:56:10PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
> If we do this, I hope a more obvious name is chosen; something like
> "mailman" might be a start. Or "mailperson", or "postperson", or
> whatever. "mta" just feels a little obscure.
May I vote for NO more predefined uids/gids at al
On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 02:22:17PM -0700, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> > Also you'll have to run the script to allow users to change passwords as
> > "root", which you probably will NOT want to do (same for adding/
> > deleting/changing users)
>
> So with your setup, any user can add/delete/modify existi
On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 02:22:17PM -0700, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> > Also you'll have to run the script to allow users to change passwords as
> > "root", which you probably will NOT want to do (same for adding/
> > deleting/changing users)
>
> So with your setup, any user can add/delete/modify exist
I would recommend qmail (http://www.qmail.org/).
It has a VERY modular structure, where you e.g. can easily substitue
the "checkpassword" module with a e.g. perl script doing the lookups.
Nothing else needs to be patched/changed and the described scenario can
be accomplished with standard qmail f
I would recommend qmail (http://www.qmail.org/).
It has a VERY modular structure, where you e.g. can easily substitue
the "checkpassword" module with a e.g. perl script doing the lookups.
Nothing else needs to be patched/changed and the described scenario can
be accomplished with standard qmail
On Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 01:23:19PM +0930, Mark Newton wrote:
> > I've found FreeBSD to outperform NT-anything in any task you throw at the
> > machine from web service to Samba for file and print service for PCs
> > running Windows.
>
> Granted. Perhaps we're seeing an artifact of NT's develo
Hoi folx,
I have a 2.2.7 system that runs out of mbuf clusters.
maxuser 64
I've raised
options NMBCLUSTERS=6144
options NBUF=3072
and that made it for a while. However the system is running a chatserver
and a webserver of a customer and now it hits me again.
Are there any pro
16 matches
Mail list logo
