On 12/24/2012 10:56 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>
> Even back when hard disks are a mote in the eyes of today's mammoths,
> you *can* make /usr part of /, there's no stopping you. Sure, other
> SysAdmins may scoff and/or question your sanity, but the choice is
> yours. YOU know what's best for your pr
On 12/23/2012 03:22 PM, luis jure wrote:
> well, it seems i have been very lucky indeed. i just emerged jmtpfs as per
> mark's suggestion, and it just worked. i just created a /media/galaxy
> directory, and an entry in fstab (like yours, but with jmtpfs instead of
> mtpfs) and that was it. now i ca
On Dec 25, 2012 1:55 AM, "Alan McKinnon" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 06:58:15 -0600
> Dale wrote:
>
> The truth is simply this (derived from empirical observation):
>
> Long ago we had established conventions about / and /usr; mostly
> because the few sysadmins around agreed on some things. In
On 25/12/12 11:21, Walter Dnes wrote:
> I'm asking questions here before filing a bug/reature-request, to make
> sure I have my ducks in a row. I did a big update a couple of days ago.
> As per the user in... http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7168984.html
> I too ran into a situation where I
On 25/12/12 11:21, Walter Dnes wrote:
> I'm asking questions here before filing a bug/reature-request, to make
> sure I have my ducks in a row. I did a big update a couple of days ago.
> As per the user in... http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7168984.html
> I too ran into a situation where I
I'm asking questions here before filing a bug/reature-request, to make
sure I have my ducks in a row. I did a big update a couple of days ago.
As per the user in... http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7168984.html
I too ran into a situation where I couldn't open any xterms because
/dev/pts was
Bruce Hill wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 06:29:07PM -0600, »Q« wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:04:13 -0600
>> Bruce Hill wrote:
>>
>>> Gentoo had mkinitrd once upon a time, but it's now in attic.
>>> Somewhere, sometime, for some reason, initramfs (inital ram
>>> filesystem) became vogue for t
Mark Knecht wrote:
> Fair enough. I don't agree that leaving Gentoo because you chose to
> put all of /usr on LVM and then chose not to deal with the
> implications of that over time, but it's your choice and I certainly
> support choice. And I appreciate you communicating your POV. I'm also
> inte
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 04:54:08PM -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 4:29 PM, »Q« wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:04:13 -0600
> > Bruce Hill wrote:
> >
> >> Gentoo had mkinitrd once upon a time, but it's now in attic.
> >> Somewhere, sometime, for some reason, initramfs (inita
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 06:29:07PM -0600, »Q« wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:04:13 -0600
> Bruce Hill wrote:
>
> > Gentoo had mkinitrd once upon a time, but it's now in attic.
> > Somewhere, sometime, for some reason, initramfs (inital ram
> > filesystem) became vogue for the Gentoo camp, rather
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 04:34:00PM -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
> I'm also interested in Bruce's history about initrd. Sounds like if
> that worked today I'd just use it to make an initrd and be done with
> it. Unlike you, I guess, I don't have any political position on these
> images that get used
Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:15 AM, Bruce Hill
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 11:05:25AM -0600, Dale wrote:
>>> Bruce Hill wrote:
>>>
>>> <<< SNIP >>>
No initrd...
>>> YET!!! ROFL
>>>
>>> When eudev goes stable, then we can disregard that yet. ;-)
>>>
>>> Dale
>
Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 4:29 PM, »Q« wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:04:13 -0600
>> Bruce Hill wrote:
>>
>>> Gentoo had mkinitrd once upon a time, but it's now in attic.
>>> Somewhere, sometime, for some reason, initramfs (inital ram
>>> filesystem) became vogue for the Gent
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 4:29 PM, »Q« wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:04:13 -0600
> Bruce Hill wrote:
>
>> Gentoo had mkinitrd once upon a time, but it's now in attic.
>> Somewhere, sometime, for some reason, initramfs (inital ram
>> filesystem) became vogue for the Gentoo camp, rather than initrd
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Bruce Hill
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 05:23:13PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote:
>>
>> Then came the decision to move udev inside /usr, forcing the issue.
>> Now, it'd been long understood that udev *itself* hadn't been broken.
>> The explanation given as much as a
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Dale wrote:
> One of the reasons I left Mandriva was because of the init thingy. If I
> wanted one and liked having one, I would have never switched to Gentoo.
> The init thingy was not the only reason but it was one of them. The
> reason I do not want one is be
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:04:13 -0600
Bruce Hill wrote:
> Gentoo had mkinitrd once upon a time, but it's now in attic.
> Somewhere, sometime, for some reason, initramfs (inital ram
> filesystem) became vogue for the Gentoo camp, rather than initrd
> (initial ram disk image), and mkinitrd got retired
Bruce Hill wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 05:23:13PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote:
>> Then came the decision to move udev inside /usr, forcing the issue.
>> Now, it'd been long understood that udev *itself* hadn't been broken.
>> The explanation given as much as a year earlier was that udev couldn't
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 05:23:13PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote:
>
> Then came the decision to move udev inside /usr, forcing the issue.
> Now, it'd been long understood that udev *itself* hadn't been broken.
> The explanation given as much as a year earlier was that udev couldn't
> control what *othe
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 04:36:06PM -0600, Dale wrote:
>
> One of the reasons I left Mandriva was because of the init thingy. If I
> wanted one and liked having one, I would have never switched to Gentoo.
> The init thingy was not the only reason but it was one of them. The
> reason I do not wan
On 24/12/12 23:52, Dale wrote:
> Kevin Chadwick wrote:
>>> Are there any other cases, apart from emotional attachment based on
>>> inertia, where a separate / and /usr are desirable? As I see it, there
>>> is only the system, and it is an atomic unit.
>> You should really read the thread before pos
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 01:23:16PM -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Dale wrote:
>
> > The problems with that is these: It worked ALL these years, why should
> > it not now? I have / on a traditional partition which is not going to
> > resize easily. If I put / on L
Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Dale wrote:
>> If I put / on LVM, I need a init thingy.
> No you don't. You could use a boot partition. Or grub2.
>
>> So, worked for ages, then it breaks when people change where they put
>> things. Answer is, don't change where you put
Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Dale wrote:
>
>> The problems with that is these: It worked ALL these years, why should
>> it not now? I have / on a traditional partition which is not going to
>> resize easily. If I put / on LVM, I need a init thingy. I don't want a
>>
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Dale wrote:
>> If I put / on LVM, I need a init thingy.
> No you don't. You could use a boot partition. Or grub2.
I don't remember reading /boot as a suggested solution. Frankly,
that's an interesting id
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 14:00:39 -0600
Dale wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 06:58:15 -0600
> > Dale wrote:
> >
> >> So, Nuno, everything was fine until they started moving things to a
> >> place where it shouldn't be.
> > No Dale, that is just flat out wrong.
> >
> > There is
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Dale wrote:
> If I put / on LVM, I need a init thingy.
No you don't. You could use a boot partition. Or grub2.
> So, worked for ages, then it breaks when people change where they put
> things. Answer is, don't change where you put things. Then things
> still wor
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Dale wrote:
> The problems with that is these: It worked ALL these years, why should
> it not now? I have / on a traditional partition which is not going to
> resize easily. If I put / on LVM, I need a init thingy. I don't want a
> init thingy
Is that really
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 09:27:13PM -0500, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote
> Walter Dnes wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 05:40:05AM -0500, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote
> > > Hi. Today on one of my test kernels where I am using git bisect to find
> > > a bug, I got the following when running lilo:
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Dale wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
[snip]
> The problems with that is these: It worked ALL these years, why should
> it not now? I have / on a traditional partition which is not going to
> resize easily. If I put / on LVM, I need a init thingy. I don't want a
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 06:58:15 -0600
> Dale wrote:
>
>> So, Nuno, everything was fine until they started moving things to a
>> place where it shouldn't be.
> No Dale, that is just flat out wrong.
>
> There is no such thing as "place where stuff should be". There are only
> co
> You may want to consider a swap file:
>
> http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/linux-add-a-swap-file-howto/
I have already done this. I had some problems trying to compile gcc, so I
learned it then.
> NB: I don't know how well it's going to help with Gentoo. It's been close to a
> decade, if not long
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:15 AM, Bruce Hill
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 11:05:25AM -0600, Dale wrote:
>> Bruce Hill wrote:
>>
>> <<< SNIP >>>
>> > No initrd...
>>
>> YET!!! ROFL
>>
>> When eudev goes stable, then we can disregard that yet. ;-)
>>
>> Dale
>
> devfs still works wonderfully ..
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 06:58:15 -0600
Dale wrote:
> So, Nuno, everything was fine until they started moving things to a
> place where it shouldn't be.
No Dale, that is just flat out wrong.
There is no such thing as "place where stuff should be". There are only
conventions, and like all convention
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Grant Edwards
wrote:
> On 2012-12-24, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>> On Monday 24 December 2012 09:24:16 AM IST, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>> I'm glad they chose MTP: I want my phone to continue to work while I'm
>>> transferring files. In order to mount the filesystem
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Bruce Hill
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:23:35AM -0800, fe...@crowfix.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> Puhleeeze don't put such long stuff in an email. Have you heard of
>> attachments?
>> pastebins?
>>
>
> Felix
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Bruce Hill
wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:23:35AM -0800, fe...@crowfix.com wrote:
>
>
> Puhleeeze don't put such long stuff in an email. Have you heard of
> attachments?
> pastebins?
>
Felix,
Personally, after years reading LKML, I have no problem with
i
On 2012-12-24, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> On Monday 24 December 2012 09:24:16 AM IST, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2012-12-23, luis jure wrote:
>>> on 2012-12-22 at 17:13 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>>
Now, imagine you are the guy at Samsung deciding what features the S2
will support. Which op
I'm on ~amd64. Updated portage in the morning.
But it seems the .38 version has a nasty bug.
It freezes the system every single time I try to compile a cross tool
chain.
I tried with various options, like reducing make jobs, etc, but didn't
help.
Back to .31 and things seem to be moving better.
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:53:34AM -0600, Bruce Hill wrote:
> This time it has 4 attachments; afaik there were zero attachments the first
> time (deleted email here so can't check now). No worries, files here now.
Yes, I originally sent no attachments, since I thought the mailing list
stripped t
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 11:05:25AM -0600, Dale wrote:
> Bruce Hill wrote:
>
> <<< SNIP >>>
> > No initrd...
>
> YET!!! ROFL
>
> When eudev goes stable, then we can disregard that yet. ;-)
>
> Dale
devfs still works wonderfully ... for principle, if no other reason, that file
server will *N
Bruce Hill wrote:
<<< SNIP >>>
> No initrd...
YET!!! ROFL
When eudev goes stable, then we can disregard that yet. ;-)
Dale
:-) :-)
--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how
you interpreted my words!
Michael Mol wrote:
> Lay off the eggnog, Dale. Too early yet. :P -- :wq
For me it is NyQuil. I'm still battling the flu. I'm kicking butt but
getting mine kicked at the same time. Other than NyQuil, no alcohol here.
Dale
:-) :-)
--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what
On Dec 24, 2012 11:46 PM, "Bruce Hill"
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 05:06:41PM +0200, Nuno J. Silva wrote:
> >
> > Now, also, from my understanding, this was already the case for some
> > time (maybe even years?). And that's why I've asked for more details.
> >
> > So, if the udev you use is
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 07:41:10AM -0800, fe...@crowfix.com wrote:
>
> I was under the impression that gentoo strips attachments. At any
> rate, I summarized as much as possible and only put the the full logs
> at the end.
Looks like the attachments got thru. I will try to remember that.
--
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:07:04AM -0600, Bruce Hill wrote:
> emerge -av app-text/wgetpaste && wgetpaste /path/to/3.6/.config
> /path/to/3.7/.config
3.6.10 .config -- http://bpaste.net/show/66307/
3.7.1 .config -- http://bpaste.net/show/66309/
> Also can you "dmesg | wgetpaste" and note the "un
This time it has 4 attachments; afaik there were zero attachments the first
time (deleted email here so can't check now). No worries, files here now.
Do you have a /var/log/messages (might be in rotated, gzipped one even) that
includes the 3.6.10 *and* 3.7.1 boot?
--
Happy Penguin Computers
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 12:25:02AM +0800, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Dec 24, 2012 10:00 PM, "Dale" wrote:
> > I have not
> > tested the theory but that is what people have been saying. Not only is
> > my /usr separate but it is on LVM partitons too.
>
> If I recall correctly, easy repartition
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Dale wrote:
> Dale wrote:
>> Michael Mol wrote:
>>> "you wouldn't have this problem if you did *something else*" is a
>>> terrible response. There are very good reasons to use LVM. There are
>>> good (IMO, at least) reasons to avoid using an initr* on Gentoo.
>>>
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 05:06:41PM +0200, Nuno J. Silva wrote:
>
> Now, also, from my understanding, this was already the case for some
> time (maybe even years?). And that's why I've asked for more details.
>
> So, if the udev you use is OK with no initrd, what is in the new udev
> that actually
On Dec 24, 2012 10:00 PM, "Dale" wrote:
> I have not
> tested the theory but that is what people have been saying. Not only is
> my /usr separate but it is on LVM partitons too.
If I recall correctly, easy repartitioning was supposed to be one of the
main reasons wy LVM was made in the first pl
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:07:04AM -0600, Bruce Hill wrote:
> Would you consider our own pastebin from portage?
Sure, in progress. I'll have to read up on this pastebin stuff.
--
... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 04:52:27PM +0100, Teodor Spæren wrote:
>
> That is my concern. If I get it working with a vanilla kernel, and then
> booting into the system,
> emerge do not work, it was all wasted.
You may want to consider a swap file:
http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/linux-add-a-swap-file
Dale wrote:
> Michael Mol wrote:
>> "you wouldn't have this problem if you did *something else*" is a
>> terrible response. There are very good reasons to use LVM. There are
>> good (IMO, at least) reasons to avoid using an initr* on Gentoo.
>> (Those reasons are sprinkled through the thread, some
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 04:05:44PM +0100, Teodor Spæren wrote:
>
> The possible work around I have thought of is just getting the vanilla kernel
> from kernel.org, but the gentoo wiki advise against it, since gentoo-sources
> is a patched kernel.
With all due respect, Gentoo is the only distro
Michael Mol wrote:
> "you wouldn't have this problem if you did *something else*" is a
> terrible response. There are very good reasons to use LVM. There are
> good (IMO, at least) reasons to avoid using an initr* on Gentoo.
> (Those reasons are sprinkled through the thread, some spoken by me,
> so
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 07:41:10AM -0800, fe...@crowfix.com wrote:
>
> I was under the impression that gentoo strips attachments. At any
> rate, I summarized as much as possible and only put the the full logs
> at the end.
>
> As for the cookies, so many sites require cookies and/or
> javascrip
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Nuno J. Silva wrote:
> On 2012-12-24, Michael Mol wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Nuno J. Silva
>> wrote:
>>> On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
>>>
> [...]
From my understanding, if I upgrade my system to the later version of
udev and bypass the
fe...@crowfix.com wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 08:35:20AM -0600, Bruce Hill wrote:
>
>> Puhleeeze don't put such long stuff in an email. Have you heard of
>> attachments?
>> pastebins?
> I was under the impression that gentoo strips attachments. At any
> rate, I summarized as much as possible
On 2012-12-24, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Nuno J. Silva wrote:
>> On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
>>
[...]
>>> From my understanding, if I upgrade my system to the later version of
>>> udev and bypass the init system, my system will not boot. I have not
>>> tested the theo
> From: nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt
> Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Ram Problem!
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:32:54 +0200
> No surprise here, from what I can see, what's happening is that *emerge*
> is running out of memory, it's not a compilation, so -pipe or MAKEOPTS
> won't make any difference here. Are
Kevin Chadwick wrote:
>> Are there any other cases, apart from emotional attachment based on
>> inertia, where a separate / and /usr are desirable? As I see it, there
>> is only the system, and it is an atomic unit.
> You should really read the thread before posting.
>
I suspect that Alan has. Al
Nuno J. Silva wrote:
> On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
>
>> Nuno J. Silva wrote:
>>> On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
>>>
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:03:25 +0200
> nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote:
>
>> On 2012-12-23, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 08:35:20AM -0600, Bruce Hill wrote:
> Puhleeeze don't put such long stuff in an email. Have you heard of
> attachments?
> pastebins?
I was under the impression that gentoo strips attachments. At any
rate, I summarized as much as possible and only put the the full logs
at
Ohh! Thanks a lot :) Still it would have been useful to know what was causing
it to go out of memory.
On 2012-12-24, Teodor Spæren wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am trying to install gentoo on an old armada m700. The specs that I
> think is relevant for this problem is the clocking speed of the cpu
> and the ram. It got 223mhz of clocking speed and 116mb ram. I have
> added 512mb of swap since I knew the r
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Nuno J. Silva wrote:
> On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
>
[snip]
>> Well, so far I have stuck with the udev that works without a init
>> thingy. I do have a init thingy for when the udev that requires it is
>> marked stable. The devs are keeping the udev that requir
> > You are only considering the case of /usr being on a plain hard disk
> > partition, what if it in on an LVM volume, or encrypted (or both)
> > of mounted over the network? All of these require something to be
> > run before they can be mounted, and if that cannot be run until udev
> > has start
> Are there any other cases, apart from emotional attachment based on
> inertia, where a separate / and /usr are desirable? As I see it, there
> is only the system, and it is an atomic unit.
You should really read the thread before posting.
--
> It was in fact a weirdo corner case
> since day 1.
Right, a weirdo corner case that is part of best practice and the
default suggestion on debian stable used on many many servers and for
good reason.
--
___
'Write programs th
There is absolutely no reason why you can't use the vanilla kernel. Go
right ahead.
On Dec 24, 2012 10:08 AM, "Teodor Spæren" wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am trying to install gentoo on an old armada m700. The specs that I
> think is relevant for this problem is the clocking speed of the cpu and the
>
Hello!
I am trying to install gentoo on an old armada m700. The specs that I think is
relevant for this problem is the clocking speed of the cpu and the ram. It got
223mhz of clocking speed and 116mb ram. I have added 512mb of swap since I knew
the ram was going to be a problem.
The command I
On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
> Nuno J. Silva wrote:
>> On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
>>
>>> Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:03:25 +0200
nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote:
> On 2012-12-23, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:22:24 +0200
>
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:23:35AM -0800, fe...@crowfix.com wrote:
Puhleeeze don't put such long stuff in an email. Have you heard of attachments?
pastebins?
Your dropbox postings lost me after reading:
Please enable browser-cookies to use the Dropbox website.
--
Happy Penguin Computers
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 03:38:15PM +0100, Florian Philipp wrote:
> Am 19.12.2012 00:20, schrieb Walter Dnes:
> > 1) In the past couple of days I finally figured out what I was doing
> > wrong with hardware acceleration (causing lack thereof) with an onboard
> > Intel GPU in my HTPC machine. I've a
Nuno J. Silva wrote:
> On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
>
>> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:03:25 +0200
>>> nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote:
>>>
On 2012-12-23, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:22:24 +0200
> nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva)
On 2012-12-23, »Q« wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 01:59:50 +0200
> nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Today, I got a bit curious, and wanted to get some sound from a
>> computer which does not have any speakers at the moment. Mostly for
>> fun, I thought about using arec
On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:03:25 +0200
>> nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote:
>>
>>> On 2012-12-23, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>>
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:22:24 +0200
nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote:
[...]
> What about ju
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:03:25 +0200
> nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote:
>
>> On 2012-12-23, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:22:24 +0200
>>> nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote:
>>>
On 2012-12-18, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Tue
Nuno J. Silva wrote:
> On 2012-12-19, Dale wrote:
>
>> Bruce Hill wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:05:14PM -0600, Dale wrote:
> [...]
Here is two links if you want to try my weird way of doing this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XITHbsUUlYI
http://www.youtube.com/watc
On 2012-12-19, Florian Philipp wrote:
> Am 19.12.2012 00:20, schrieb Walter Dnes:
>> 1) In the past couple of days I finally figured out what I was doing
>> wrong with hardware acceleration (causing lack thereof) with an onboard
>> Intel GPU in my HTPC machine. I've applied the same fix to my des
On 2012-12-19, Dale wrote:
> Bruce Hill wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:05:14PM -0600, Dale wrote:
[...]
>>> Here is two links if you want to try my weird way of doing this:
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XITHbsUUlYI
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2Innx3puNI
>>>
>>> I use dow
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:06:27 +0800
Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Walter Dnes
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 08:39:41PM +, Neil Bothwick wrote
> >
> >> You are only considering the case of /usr being on a plain hard
> >> disk partition, what if it in on an
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 08:39:41PM +, Neil Bothwick wrote
>
>> You are only considering the case of /usr being on a plain hard disk
>> partition, what if it in on an LVM volume, or encrypted (or both)
>> of mounted over the network? All of
84 matches
Mail list logo
