>>> On 7/7/2015 at 02:36 PM, in message <559b7366.5030...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
> Am 07.07.2015 um 08:34 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
> >
> On 7/7/2015 at 02:19 PM, in message <559B6F79.237 : 102 : 21807>, Chun
> Yan
> Liu
> > wrote:
> >>
> > On 7/7/2015 at 02:03 PM, i
Am 07.07.2015 um 08:34 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
On 7/7/2015 at 02:19 PM, in message <559B6F79.237 : 102 : 21807>, Chun Yan Liu
wrote:
On 7/7/2015 at 02:03 PM, in message <559b6bbe.3050...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
Am 07.07.2015 um 07:59 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
On 7/7/2015 at 01:50 PM
>>> On 7/7/2015 at 02:19 PM, in message <559B6F79.237 : 102 : 21807>, Chun Yan
>>> Liu
wrote:
>
>
On 7/7/2015 at 02:03 PM, in message <559b6bbe.3050...@kamp.de>, Peter
Lieven
> wrote:
> > Am 07.07.2015 um 07:59 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
>> >
>> On 7/7/2015 at 01:50 PM, in
Am 07.07.2015 um 08:19 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
On 7/7/2015 at 02:03 PM, in message <559b6bbe.3050...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
Am 07.07.2015 um 07:59 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
On 7/7/2015 at 01:50 PM, in message <559b68b2.5060...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
Am 07.07.2015 um 03:50 schrieb
>>> On 7/7/2015 at 02:03 PM, in message <559b6bbe.3050...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
> Am 07.07.2015 um 07:59 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
> >
> On 7/7/2015 at 01:50 PM, in message <559b68b2.5060...@kamp.de>, Peter
> Lieven
> > wrote:
> >> Am 07.07.2015 um 03:50 schrieb Chun Yan Liu
Am 07.07.2015 um 07:59 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
On 7/7/2015 at 01:50 PM, in message <559b68b2.5060...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
Am 07.07.2015 um 03:50 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
On 7/6/2015 at 06:42 PM, in message <559a5b79.4010...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
Am 06.07.2015 um 11:44 schrieb
>>> On 7/7/2015 at 01:50 PM, in message <559b68b2.5060...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
> Am 07.07.2015 um 03:50 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
> >
> On 7/6/2015 at 06:42 PM, in message <559a5b79.4010...@kamp.de>, Peter
> Lieven
> > wrote:
> >> Am 06.07.2015 um 11:44 schrieb Chun Yan Liu
Am 07.07.2015 um 03:50 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
On 7/6/2015 at 06:42 PM, in message <559a5b79.4010...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
Am 06.07.2015 um 11:44 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
While testing with a 1GB VHD file created on win7, found that the VHD file
size reported on Windows is different from
>>> On 7/6/2015 at 06:42 PM, in message <559a5b79.4010...@kamp.de>, Peter Lieven
wrote:
> Am 06.07.2015 um 11:44 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
> > While testing with a 1GB VHD file created on win7, found that the VHD file
> > size reported on Windows is different from that is reported by qemu-img
>
Am 06.07.2015 um 11:44 schrieb Chun Yan Liu:
While testing with a 1GB VHD file created on win7, found that the VHD file
size reported on Windows is different from that is reported by qemu-img
info or within a Linux KVM guest.
Created a dynamic VHD file on win7, on Windows, it is reported 1024MB
While testing with a 1GB VHD file created on win7, found that the VHD file
size reported on Windows is different from that is reported by qemu-img
info or within a Linux KVM guest.
Created a dynamic VHD file on win7, on Windows, it is reported 1024MB
(2097152 sectors). But with qemu-img info or wi
11 matches
Mail list logo