On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 3:04 PM Brian wrote:
>
> On Tue 01 Jan 2019 at 12:34:38 -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
>
> > A scanned document from Canon pixma mx870 printer is significantly
> > larger compared to the same document scanned on a different scanner.
>
> Which is...?
Do not have this info
On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 1:40 PM wrote:
>
> Yep. The one image is encoded as CCITT (aka Group 4, aka fax [1]), which is
> passable for low res B&W images, but not that much for hi-res or color (or
> gray scale). It compresses much worse than the other which is JPEG, which is
> expressly made for hi-
On 2018-12-29 6:40 p.m., Gary Dale wrote:
I've added a second NIC to a server and am trying to configure the
virtual bridge network to work with it.
I configured the network bonding initially as per
https://wiki.debian.org/Bonding#Using_systemd-networkd but I couldn't
get virt-manager to take
On Tue 01 Jan 2019 at 06:24:58 (-0600), Richard Owlett wrote:
> All my machines have MATE desktop. They are various releases of Jessie
> and Stretch.
>
> If the USB device is connected at boot, the individual partitions can
> be unmounted.
>
> However, if the device is connected after boot indivi
On Tue 01 Jan 2019 at 13:45:48 (-0500), Lee wrote:
> On 1/1/19, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >>> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
> >>> It was ori
On Tue 01 Jan 2019 at 12:34:38 -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> A scanned document from Canon pixma mx870 printer is significantly
> larger compared to the same document scanned on a different scanner.
Which is...?
> When I look at both the images side by side on a PC, there is no
> visual di
Hi.
My PC has two disks, a NVME for Debian/testing and an old 2.5 drive for
an OS that shall remain nameless :)
Since the 2.5 disc isn't at all used by Linux, I figured I might as well
set a very aggressive spindown time of, say, 30s and I wrote this in
hdparm.conf:
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-Hi
On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 07:55:55PM +0100, Anders Andersson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:40 PM wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 12:34:38PM -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
[...]
> > OTOH, CCITT is lossless and JPEG lossy ;-)
> >
>
> Not sure what you mean by "compresses much worse" he
Hi,
tomas wrote:
> > Yep. The one image is encoded as CCITT
> > It compresses much worse than the other which is JPEG,
Anders Andersson wrote:
> Not sure what you mean by "compresses much worse" here, but the CCITT
> version is much smaller than the JPEG version.
Because it uses 1 bit per channe
On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:40 PM wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 12:34:38PM -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> > A scanned document from Canon pixma mx870 printer is significantly
> > larger compared to the same document scanned on a different scanner.
> > When I look at both the images side by s
On 1/1/19, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
>>> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
>>
On 01/01/2019 11:30 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 11:20:19AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
OK. So perhaps your USB bus fainted for a short while. Still I
hope you understood that going by the /dev/sdX names involves
"some" risk.
I'm innocent. The /dev/sdX reference was
On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 12:34:38PM -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> A scanned document from Canon pixma mx870 printer is significantly
> larger compared to the same document scanned on a different scanner.
> When I look at both the images side by side on a PC, there is no
> visual difference bet
A scanned document from Canon pixma mx870 printer is significantly
larger compared to the same document scanned on a different scanner.
When I look at both the images side by side on a PC, there is no
visual difference between the two. I am trying to understand the
underlying cause and fix it if po
On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 11:20:19AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
[...]
> >To a first approximation:
> >
> > tomas@trotzki:~$ cat /etc/debian_version
> > 9.6
[...]
> My system reports 9.1 {as I thought it was}
> It was initially installed from
On 01/01/2019 08:03 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
the shop for cooling problems.
I attempted to
On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 06:07:21AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
> It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in
> the shop for cooling problems.
>
> I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debia
On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 06:24:58 -0600
Richard Owlett wrote:
> All my machines have MATE desktop. They are various releases of
> Jessie and Stretch.
>
> If the USB device is connected at boot, the individual partitions can
> be unmounted.
>
> However, if the device is connected after boot individual
Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> Thanks, but the problem persists after doing:
>
> # usermod -a -G plugdev rodolfo
>
> Any other suggestions?
Did you log in again?
Next would be some kind of configuration somewhere - but I can't help - no
idea what your desktop is, or what your setup is.
Rodolfo Medina writes:
> deloptes writes:
>
>> Rodolfo Medina wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all.
>>>
>>> In my /etc/fstab I have:
>>>
>>> UUID=76E8-CACF /mnt/2TBusbdrive exfat rw,user,noauto 0
>>> 0
>>>
>>> , but when I try to mount it as normal user I get:
>>>
>>> $ mount /mnt/2TB
deloptes writes:
> Rodolfo Medina wrote:
>
>> Hi all.
>>
>> In my /etc/fstab I have:
>>
>> UUID=76E8-CACF /mnt/2TBusbdrive exfat rw,user,noauto 0
>> 0
>>
>> , but when I try to mount it as normal user I get:
>>
>> $ mount /mnt/2TBusbdrive/
>> FUSE exfat 1.3.0
>> ERROR:
All my machines have MATE desktop. They are various releases of Jessie
and Stretch.
If the USB device is connected at boot, the individual partitions can be
unmounted.
However, if the device is connected after boot individual partitions can
not be unmounted with the GUI.
This is *UNACCEPTA
I am trying to modify the partitioning of a 240GB USB connected SSD.
It was originally created on a laptop running Debian 9.1 which is in the
shop for cooling problems.
I attempted to repartition it on a laptop running Debian 8.6 and
received an error message that the installed revision of e2f
Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> In my /etc/fstab I have:
>
> UUID=76E8-CACF /mnt/2TBusbdrive exfat rw,user,noauto 0
> 0
>
> , but when I try to mount it as normal user I get:
>
> $ mount /mnt/2TBusbdrive/
> FUSE exfat 1.3.0
> ERROR: failed to open '/dev/sdb1': Permis
On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 10:21 am Gary Dale On 2018-12-30 3:04 a.m., Reco wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 06:40:57PM -0500, Gary Dale wrote:
> >> Any suggestions?
> > Keep your bonding as it is.
> > Forget about conventional Linux bridges, and do not use them ever.
> > Reconfigure y
Hi all.
In my /etc/fstab I have:
UUID=76E8-CACF /mnt/2TBusbdrive exfatrw,user,noauto 0 0
, but when I try to mount it as normal user I get:
$ mount /mnt/2TBusbdrive/
FUSE exfat 1.3.0
ERROR: failed to open '/dev/sdb1': Permission denied.
Instead, as root, I can mount it
26 matches
Mail list logo
