On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 05:50:16PM +0300, Ariel Biener wrote:
>Has anyone had problems with them in production servers (with emphasis
> on networking and IO, using 1GB of memory on a dual pIII
> architecture).
Unless you have to, why would you want to go with a prerelease kernel?
If you have
Shlomi Fish wrote:
>If anyone thinks of hosting his projects on bkbits.net - think again. This
>E-mail can prove it. While I may have (with doubt) been a troll, I never
>implicitly or explictly said that I want my projects being unhosted. That
>and I still like BitKeeper enough to try it for the
Mark Veltzer wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Wednesday 25 September 2002 12:32, you wrote:
>
>
>>the statistical chance that such a case will happen, is
>>almost zero. So when it happens, it's exciting.
>>
>>
>
>The statistics become much higher when you realize
Eli Marmor wrote:
>I'd like to bring the attention of readers who are not aware of that,
>that both of the leading(*) Linux disros are going to release major
>versions in the following days (it seems that the Goyim adopted the
>Jewish/Hebrew saying "acharei HaChagim"...).
>
>With a new version on
Hi People,
I was wondering if someone knows some pointers how to use the above modem
under Linux, an updated kernel module etc please?
Any pointers will be appericiated..
Thanks,
Hetz
To unsubscribe, send
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTE
Title: Message
Hi!
Lots
of people had requests about the pictures... I removed some, and renamed some,
Those
of you who want something changed - please let me know exactly
what.
I`d
prefer to remove your name then to remove the picture - all requests will be
respected.
Tal.
P.S.
Title: Message
Here's a
link:
http://www.achituv.com/pictures/instparty/
Please let me know
if there are any corrections needed.
Thanks everyone for
coming,
Tal.
OG>> Well, I have compiled all sorts of C and C++ stuff on a daily basis
OG>> with all the versions released and haven't encountered any problems
Which doesn't say it is not buggy. Actually, I *know* it *is* buggy,
because I had pretty simple C code that it miscompiles (or, more
precisely, misopt
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Oleg Kobets wrote:
> Slow ??!?!
Yeah.
> Well, I guess it might be considering I have ADSL and it's u/l stuff right
> now to US.
You are serving http on ADSL with a 96kbit/s (if you have wow-extra) link
and you are mystified about it being slow ? :)
> btw, you failed to s
Slow ??!?!
Well, I guess it might be considering I have ADSL and it's u/l stuff right
now to US.
btw, you failed to suck one thumb, the marc puter one. please correct it.
Oleg.
- Original Message -
From: "Ariel Biener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Oleg Kobets" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Linu
Mark Veltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Do you notice anything wrong with the previous statement ?!?
Mark, with all due respect - are you trolling? OK, I'll feed you, even
though the subject has been beaten to death elsewhere. Red Hat made an
important and informed decision (NB: this is not t
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Oleg Kobets wrote:
Hi,
Since this site is s incredibly slow, I have web-sucked it into
http://www.tau.ac.il/~ariel/instparty/
Enjoy,
--Ariel
> Hi!
>
> I've uploaded the pictures I made from the InstaParty.
>
> Get them at: http://www.clean-mail.net/party
>
> En
> Do you notice anything wrong with the previous statement ?!?
> gcc-2.96-112. First - prey tell how can you tell the version aparts ? (the
> first I don't know how many versions didn't have ANY identification).
umm, gcc -v?
hetz]$ gcc -v
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.9
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 25 September 2002 18:01, you wrote:
> Wrong in both terms:
>
> 1. GCC 2.96 to me seems very stable these days - and I have more then
> enough compile expirience with it (I use 2.96 only up until few days ago).
> It had few problems when
Hi!
I've uploaded the pictures I made from the
InstaParty.
Get them at: http://www.clean-mail.net/party
Enjoy :)
---Oleg KobetsNetwork
Administratorwww.clean-mail.net
>Has anyone had problems with them in production servers (with emphasis
> on networking and IO, using 1GB of memory on a dual pIII architecture).
Red Hat's Kernel 2.4.18-10 is very stable, from my tests (well, other then
the fact that its not ignoring my ACPI), and there should be 2.4.18-14
> The statistics become much higher when you realize that:
> 1. Redhat wants to change the buggy 2.96 compiler (which actually has about
> 5 versions I am ware of that they refuse to admit or tag as different
> versions). 2. Mandrake is compatible to RH (meaning Mandrake want you to be
> able to i
Hi,
Has anyone had problems with them in production servers (with emphasis
on networking and IO, using 1GB of memory on a dual pIII architecture).
--Ariel
--
Ariel Biener
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP(6.5.8) public key http://www.tau.ac.il/~ariel/pgp.html
==
On Wednesday 25 September 2002 17:15, FW Admin wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> We have Red Hat 7.2 , kernel 2.4.9-34 from up2date.
>
> I need to boot the machine somehow, because there is a problem with
> /dev/sda1, which is in software mirror with /dev/sdd1 (/dev/md1). The box
> still boots up, but refu
Ely Levy wrote:
>
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Eli Marmor wrote:
>
> > I'd like to bring the attention of readers who are not aware of that,
> > that both of the leading(*) Linux disros are going to release major
> > versions in the following days (it seems that the Goyim adopted the
> > Jewish/Hebrew
Title: RedHat boot diskette
Hello list,
We have Red Hat 7.2 , kernel 2.4.9-34 from up2date.
I need to boot the machine somehow, because there is a problem with /dev/sda1, which is in software mirror with /dev/sdd1 (/dev/md1). The box still boots up, but refuses to boot if i remove the /dev
If anyone thinks of hosting his projects on bkbits.net - think again. This
E-mail can prove it. While I may have (with doubt) been a troll, I never
implicitly or explictly said that I want my projects being unhosted. That
and I still like BitKeeper enough to try it for the while for unimportant
t
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2002, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: Help with a Bourne Shell Script":
> > Sometimes I do "expr 5 \> 6 > /dev/null" instead.
>
> Well, you shouldn't... Expr wasn't meant for these kinds of things, and
> you just saw how this can cause you b
mirror synced, so don't drool over the ftp;)
Ely Levy
System group
Hebrew University
Jerusalem Israel
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo u
Guy Baruch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I assume bidi support is really better than in current products, are
> the algorithms patented ?
I presume that Qtext dates back to the blissful old days when
algorithms could not be patented...
--
Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: Help with a Bourne Shell Script":
> Sometimes I do "expr 5 \> 6 > /dev/null" instead.
Well, you shouldn't... Expr wasn't meant for these kinds of things, and
you just saw how this can cause you bugs. Do "test 5 -gt 6" instead.
--
Nadav Har'El
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 25 September 2002 12:32, you wrote:
> the statistical chance that such a case will happen, is
> almost zero. So when it happens, it's exciting.
The statistics become much higher when you realize that:
1. Redhat wants to change the buggy
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Eli Marmor wrote:
> I'd like to bring the attention of readers who are not aware of that,
> that both of the leading(*) Linux disros are going to release major
> versions in the following days (it seems that the Goyim adopted the
> Jewish/Hebrew saying "acharei HaChagim"...).
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002, Guy Baruch wrote about "Re: Qtext":
> +---
> + Guy Baruch , Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institue.
> + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> + phone: 972-8-934-2211
> +
Guy Baruch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [25/09/02 12:27]:
>
> There's something in this thread I may be a bit too simple to understand.
>
> I assume bidi support is really better than in current products, are the
> algorithms
> patented ?
This question never occured to me, and he didn't mention anythi
I'd like to bring the attention of readers who are not aware of that,
that both of the leading(*) Linux disros are going to release major
versions in the following days (it seems that the Goyim adopted the
Jewish/Hebrew saying "acharei HaChagim"...).
With a new version once per half a year, and a
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2002, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Help with a Bourne Shell Script":
> > http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/fetchweb
> > My problem is that proc_args does not return the new command line.
>
> That's because parse_args returned "0\n0\nyour argu
There's something in this thread I may be a bit too simple to understand.
I assume bidi support is really better than in current products, are the
algorithms
patented ?
if so, I'm not really sure what good will releasing _the source_ to public
domain will do, at least for law-abiding entities
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Help with a Bourne Shell Script":
> http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/fetchweb
> My problem is that proc_args does not return the new command line.
That's because parse_args returned "0\n0\nyour arguments" instead of
"your arguments",
The problem i
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 09:56:34AM +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote:
>
> Check:
>
> http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/fetchweb
>
> My problem is that proc_args does not return the new command line.
You probably meant 'test' and not expr in line 54.
expr, besides setting the return value, also outputs
35 matches
Mail list logo
