Re: time out

2004-11-22 Thread Andrea Vettorello
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:37:17 +, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrea Vettorello wrote: > > > > On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:59:33 +, michael > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>michael wrote: > >> > >>>I can't see any discussion on this list of the merits (or otherwise!) of > >>>timeo

Re: time out

2004-11-22 Thread michael
Andrea Vettorello wrote: On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:59:33 +, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: michael wrote: I can't see any discussion on this list of the merits (or otherwise!) of timeoutd or autolog (or better equivalent)... thoughts? Michael running on 2.4.27-1-686-smp #1 SMP Fri Sep 3 06:34:

Re: time out

2004-11-21 Thread Andrea Vettorello
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:59:33 +, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > michael wrote: > > I can't see any discussion on this list of the merits (or otherwise!) of > > timeoutd or autolog (or better equivalent)... thoughts? > > Michael running on > > 2.4.27-1-686-smp #1 SMP Fri Sep 3 06:34:36 UTC

Re: time out

2004-11-20 Thread michael
michael wrote: I can't see any discussion on this list of the merits (or otherwise!) of timeoutd or autolog (or better equivalent)... thoughts? Michael running on 2.4.27-1-686-smp #1 SMP Fri Sep 3 06:34:36 UTC 2004 i686 GNU/Linux Actually autolog doesn't do what it claims. I logged in to a console