On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 06:36:02AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ah .. well, you see, if I've got the luxury of setting my own
> conditions, I'd say 'sorry, we signed off on a spec which didn't include
> that feature. It can go in the next release'.
>
> Of course, I have that luxury in every
Mary Gardiner wrote:
>
> The
> programmers are still feature-bloating (at management request) and hunting
> out old and new bugs.
Ah .. well, you see, if I've got the luxury of setting my own
conditions, I'd say 'sorry, we signed off on a spec which didn't include
that feature. It can go in the
At Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:10:10 -0600 (CST) , Kristin Ziel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I can get this to you tomorrow...my computer is at home and i have no net
>contact there..
>
>thanks!
>
>> hi kristin
>>
>> send me the output of "route -n" and "ifconfig eth0".
>> i think i can give u the sol
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 10:37:53PM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Well I think Linux kernel is declared stable when there are no
> > *showstoppers* - I don't know about no *bugs*.
>
> There will be bugs.
But is 2.4 going to be release with any of the bugs they know about n
> I'd say free of all known bugs - who would willingly, knowingly, release
> buggy software as anything other than an alpha or a beta release?
That would be stupid, not to mention impossible.
If you're going to try to do right by your users, you want to release
something as soon as the benefits
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Well I think Linux kernel is declared stable when there are no
> *showstoppers* - I don't know about no *bugs*.
I forgot to mention one thing. The current kernel bug list is maintained by
Ted T'so at http://linux24.sourceforge.net/. The ones that have to be fixed
bef
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Well I think Linux kernel is declared stable when there are no
> *showstoppers* - I don't know about no *bugs*.
There will be bugs. They will be squashed in succeeding 2.4 releases, as is
happening with 2.2 right now. The thing with a new stable series is that the
us
Mary Gardiner wrote:
> Well I think Linux kernel is declared stable when there are no
> *showstoppers* - I don't know about no *bugs*. But I'm sure there are
> people on this list who follow linux development a bit more closely than I
> do (says she running kernel 2.2.14).
I don't know how Linu
Laurel Fan wrote:
>
> Excerpts from linuxchix: 21-Nov-100 [techtalk] Re: Technical is.. by
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > And not just free of known bugs, but tested well.
>
> So, how do you test well? What testing procedures and methodolgies
> should be used? And how can adequate coverage be ensured
On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 09:09:53AM +1100, Mary Gardiner wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 01:25:38PM -0500, Laurel Fan wrote:
>
> >
> > What factors would you take into consideration, and what
> > would your plan look like?
>
> And where do you concentrate your energies?
>
> Do you subscribe to
Hi Naomi
I thought you might find the following helpful
http://www.redhat.com/support/manuals/RHL-6.2-Manual/ref-guide/ch-raid.html
I have experienced major problems getting RHAT to recognize the very same
controller that you are using. Finally in the interest of saving the remaining
hair that
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 01:25:38PM -0500, Laurel Fan wrote:
>
> What factors would you take into consideration, and what
> would your plan look like?
And where do you concentrate your energies?
Do you subscribe to the 10% of the code == 90% of the bugs thing and look
in the areas where known b
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 01:06:06PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'd say free of all known bugs - who would willingly, knowingly, release
> buggy software as anything other than an alpha or a beta release?
> (ok, ok. What /sane/ entity?)
>
> And not just free of known bugs, but tested well.
>
Jenn Vesperman wrote:
> Mary Gardiner wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 09:29:04AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > As for release 1.0: when there's a complete, bugtested set of features
> > > which provide at least a minimum functionality for the type of program.
> > > (Not an alpha or a be
setup a virtualhost that points to a different docroot.
http://www.apache.org/docs/vhosts/examples.html
-tricia
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Davida Schiff wrote:
|Hi,
|
|I want to add a 2nd website (i.e. intranet) to my Apache Web Server and have
|no idea on how to do it. Can anyone point me in the rig
Excerpts from linuxchix: 21-Nov-100 [techtalk] Re: Technical is.. by
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> And not just free of known bugs, but tested well.
So, how do you test well? What testing procedures and methodolgies
should be used? And how can adequate coverage be ensured?
Scenario: You are designing a
Hi,
I want to add a 2nd website (i.e. intranet) to my Apache Web Server and have
no idea on how to do it. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
TIA,
Davida
The mind I love must still have wild places, a tangled orchard where dark
damsons drop in the heavy grass, an overgrown little wood,
Nicoya--
Some of these I have tried, some not... I'll give them a go tonight and
let you know :)
Kristin
> 1. Can you add a static route that is not your default route? ie. if you're
> adding 192.168.0.0 as your default, try adding a static 192.168.0.[machine's
> ip] netmask 255.255.255.255
Mary Gardiner wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 09:29:04AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > As for release 1.0: when there's a complete, bugtested set of features
> > which provide at least a minimum functionality for the type of program.
> > (Not an alpha or a beta, but fully bugtested)
> >
At Tue, 21 Nov 2000 08:43:15 -0600 (CST) , Kristin Ziel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Hi all--
>
>Well, I crashed my computer and had to do a new reinstall. I'm coming up
>with a strange error message, and my search for information on the
>web proved fruitless.
>
>For some reason, I get a "Netw
Hi all--
Well, I crashed my computer and had to do a new reinstall. I'm coming up
with a strange error message, and my search for information on the
web proved fruitless.
For some reason, I get a "Network is unreachable" error message when I try
to add my default route
/sbin/route add default
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 09:29:04AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> As for release 1.0: when there's a complete, bugtested set of features
> which provide at least a minimum functionality for the type of program.
> (Not an alpha or a beta, but fully bugtested)
> IMO. YMMV.
Bugtested to what exte
At Sat, 18 Nov 2000 22:11:55 -0600 , "S. Stubbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>Hey, it has been a while now and I have not been able to mount my
>CDROM drive. I have mdk 7.2. I have one cdrom drive, it is recognized
>correctly in the hardware.
>It is IOMEGA Zip650 cd writer drive which is an
Naomi Hospodarsky wrote:
>
> hey folks,
>
> Anyone have any tips regarding taking an existing RedHat 6.2 server and
> adding a RAID controller to it?
> I've got the driver loading (I think) but when I boot, I only see my
> original disk. How do I tell RH that there's a whole new giant space that
Mary Gardiner wrote:
> But when I first read the term "technical issues" I thought about a list
> where topics of discussion were more: what's a good design for an SMTP
> program? when's a good time for a program to enter release 1.0? (Both
> questions I've faced recently.)
Well, I'd be very hap
25 matches
Mail list logo
