When configuring a primary and secondary sendmail server, how does the
secondary mail server know it should relay anythign to the primary one?
Is it just by the mailserver examining the DNS mx records, or is there
something else in either of the sendmail configurations?
Steve
--
Website: www
When I try logging on after booting up FC15 for the first time... oh no!
It's extremely irritating to get a cute message that offers no useful
information whatsoever.
My impression from cursory scanning of this list is that gnome 3 doesn't
work with a lot of hardware configurations. Is this likel
--
When configuring a primary and secondary sendmail server, how does the
secondary mail server know it should relay anythign to the primary one?
Is it just by the mailserver examining the DNS mx records, or is there
something else in either of the sendmail configurations?
Steve
---
Once upon a time, Steve Searle said:
> When configuring a primary and secondary sendmail server, how does the
> secondary mail server know it should relay anythign to the primary one?
>
> Is it just by the mailserver examining the DNS mx records, or is there
> something else in either of the send
On Sat, 2011-07-23 at 00:06 +0100, James Bridge wrote:
> OK, I now understand what is going on. Software updates are divided into
> two groups, security updates and others. Security updates are
> implemented as they arise, taking account of your preferences in
> "Software Updates". The others are q
On 07/29/2011 04:34 PM, Techie wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We were required to change the hostname of our LDAP server running
> 389-DS. Since that time the LDAP server runs fine but the admin server
> does not authenticate login any longer, meaning i cannot log into the
> admin server. What do I need to do
This Dell DM4700 came with 2-256 mb strips, some time ago I added
2-1 gb strips for a total of 2.5 gb.
This morning I replaced the 256 mb strips with 2-2 gb for a total of
6. The bios setup screen shows 6 gb but apparently Linux is only
using half that amount, not much of an i
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:38:15 -0400, BG (Bob) wrote:
>
> This Dell DM4700 came with 2-256 mb strips, some time ago I added
> 2-1 gb strips for a total of 2.5 gb.
>
> This morning I replaced the 256 mb strips with 2-2 gb for a total of
> 6. The bios setup screen shows 6 gb but appa
On 07/29/2011 06:06 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:38:15 -0400, BG (Bob) wrote:
>
>> This Dell DM4700 came with 2-256 mb strips, some time ago I added
>> 2-1 gb strips for a total of 2.5 gb.
>>
>> This morning I replaced the 256 mb strips with 2-2 gb for a total
I recommend to you that you install the 64 bits version to can able to use
all available RAM memory in your system.
Regards
2011/7/29 Bob Goodwin
>
>This Dell DM4700 came with 2-256 mb strips, some time ago I added
>2-1 gb strips for a total of 2.5 gb.
>
>This morning I replaced the
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:06:58 +0200
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:38:15 -0400, BG (Bob) wrote:
>
> >
> > This Dell DM4700 came with 2-256 mb strips, some time ago I added
> > 2-1 gb strips for a total of 2.5 gb.
> >
> > This morning I replaced the 256 mb strips wi
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:59:06 -0430
Marcos Luis Ortiz Valmaseda wrote:
> I recommend to you that you install the 64 bits version to can able to use
> all available RAM memory in your system.
A Dell DM 4700 isn't going to have a 64bit capable CPU in most
configurations
--
users mailing list
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:06:58 +0200
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:38:15 -0400, BG (Bob) wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > This Dell DM4700 came with 2-256 mb strips, some time ago I added
>> > 2-1 gb strips for a total of 2.5 gb.
On 29/07/11 11:06, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:38:15 -0400, BG (Bob) wrote:
>
>> This Dell DM4700 came with 2-256 mb strips, some time ago I added
>> 2-1 gb strips for a total of 2.5 gb.
>>
>> This morning I replaced the 256 mb strips with 2-2 gb for a total of
>
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Don't take this as authoritative, I'm not on the 389-ds team.
>
> I think the problem is that 389-ds-base was added to RHEL as a base package
> in 6.1 so if it gets added to epel there is going to be a conflict.
Centos 6 is based off RHEL
On Jul 29, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Brett Dikeman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
>
>> Don't take this as authoritative, I'm not on the 389-ds team.
>>
>> I think the problem is that 389-ds-base was added to RHEL as a base package
>> in 6.1 so if it gets added to epel
On 07/29/2011 04:54 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
> On 29/07/11 11:06, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:38:15 -0400, BG (Bob) wrote:
>>
>>> This Dell DM4700 came with 2-256 mb strips, some time ago I added
>>> 2-1 gb strips for a total of 2.5 gb.
>>>
>>> This morning I repl
On 29/07/11 11:39, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:06:58 +0200
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> Install the kernel-PAE package, then reboot to the PAE kernel and remove
>> the normal kernel package.
> I suspect a more fundamental problem. At least according to the Dell
> material the Dime
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:13:23 +0100, AH (Andrew) wrote:
> > Mem: 3095008
> >
> > I have not yet removed the original non-PAE kernels but I am booting
> > to the new PAE kernel. It looks like something else is going on.
> > Might be something in the bios configuration that nee
> Rumor has it there has been a mass exodus from Centos and the ports may be
> a little behind. You might want to look at Scientific Linux.
>
RHEL should still be possible, as far as I still know its free, you just
don't get support. Just an idea if that helps..
--
389 users mailing list
389-us.
> The other computer now F-14 32 bit, shows cp0/cp1 as 64 bit
> under lshw
> but the basic computer as 32 bit. Is that because it's running
> 32 or is that a limitation?
I've no idea what lshw does or where it gets it information from.
> Maybe I know the an
> If the CPU is not fully 64 bit, then it will only use (not see) 4GB of
> memory. After completing overhead actions this leaves something in
Nope. An x86 processor with PAE can be 32bit but can address 36bits of
address space (just not directly all at once). This needs a lot of
management and if
On 29/07/11 12:17, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:13:23 +0100, AH (Andrew) wrote:
>
>>> Mem: 3095008
>>>
>>> I have not yet removed the original non-PAE kernels but I am booting
>>> to the new PAE kernel. It looks like something else is going on.
>>> Migh
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
Nothing to do with the addressing capabilities. Its 64bit wide data (ie
DDR)
> And it also appears to say the bios is 64 bit. I'm not sure how to
> interpret all this.
Nothing about 64bit in the BIOS info (nor
On 29/07/11 12:33, Alan Cox wrote:
>> The other computer now F-14 32 bit, shows cp0/cp1 as 64 bit
>> under lshw
>> but the basic computer as 32 bit. Is that because it's running
>> 32 or is that a limitation?
> I've no idea what lshw does or where it gets it info
> nx lm constant_tsc pebs bts pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl cid cx
>
> That appears to be there ...
Thats a 64bit capable processor yes, so you'll be able to run a 64bit
kernel on it.
Alan
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
htt
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:36:42 -0400, BG (Bob) wrote:
> > What does the "dmidecode" (from the package with the same name) say about
> > the memory controller capabilities and the used banks?
>
> That produces a huge amount of information but part is:
>
> Handle 0x1100, DMI type 17, 27
On 29/07/11 12:46, Alan Cox wrote:
>> nx lm constant_tsc pebs bts pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl cid cx
>>
>> That appears to be there ...
> Thats a 64bit capable processor yes, so you'll be able to run a 64bit
> kernel on it.
>
> Alan
>
Ok, I will stop wasting everyone's time, bite the b
On 07/29/2011 05:51 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
> On 29/07/11 12:46, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> nx lm constant_tsc pebs bts pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl cid cx
>>>
>>> That appears to be there ...
>> Thats a 64bit capable processor yes, so you'll be able to run a 64bit
>> kernel on it.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>
On 29/07/11 12:49, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:36:42 -0400, BG (Bob) wrote:
>
>>> What does the "dmidecode" (from the package with the same name) say about
>>> the memory controller capabilities and the used banks?
>> That produces a huge amount of information but part is:
On 29/07/11 12:53, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 07/29/2011 05:51 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
>> On 29/07/11 12:46, Alan Cox wrote:
nx lm constant_tsc pebs bts pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl cid cx
That appears to be there ...
>>> Thats a 64bit capable processor yes, so you'll be able t
Chris Adams wrote:
[snip]
> You really need the secondary to have some way of knowing all the valid
> recipient addresses at the domain (and have any spam filtering
> configured to match), so it doesn't accept mail that the primary
> wouldn't.
> This is more complicated; for sendmail, you have t
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 11:10 +0100, John Horne wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently upgraded (via fresh installs) both my home PC and work PC to
> Fedora 15. No problems generally, but one odd thing I noticed.
>
> In firefox the reload button is a green colour at work, but grey at
> home. Not 'greyed-ou
33 matches
Mail list logo
