On 08/14/2012 02:49 AM, Cinder wrote:
> I'm at a loss, as to how to solve this problem. Any advice would be
> greatly appreciated
>
> # emerge --info '=dev-python/python-dateutil-2.1'
> Portage 2.1.10.65 (default/linux/amd64/10.0/desktop, gcc-4.5.3,
> glibc-2.14.1-r3, 3.3.8-gentoo x86_64)
>
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 01:16:05 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > ...unlike grocers' apostrophe's, which crop up everywhere and are far
> > more grating for me.
>
> Agreed, except that I think you mean greengrocers'.
Both are valid. Greengrocers' is the more common, grocers' is shorter.
When you a
Thank you kindly Alex, running python-updater did the trick.
--- i.am.the.mem...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Alex
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] emerge dev-python/python-dateutil-2.1 failed
(compile phase)
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 03:22:40 -0400
On 08/14/2012 02:49 AM, Ci
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14.08.2012 09:55, Cinder wrote:
> Unpacking source... Unpacking python-dateutil-2.1.tar.gz to
> /var/tmp/portage/dev-python/python-dateutil-2.1/work Source
> unpacked in
> /var/tmp/portage/dev-python/python-dateutil-2.1/work
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14.08.2012 10:13, Hinnerk van Bruinehsen wrote:
> On 14.08.2012 09:55, Cinder wrote:
>> Unpacking source... Unpacking python-dateutil-2.1.tar.gz
>> to /var/tmp/portage/dev-python/python-dateutil-2.1/work
>> Source unpacked in
>> /v
On 13.08.2012 16:53, Michael Hampicke wrote:
> 2012/8/13 Daniel Troeder 3rd thought: purging old files with "find"? your cache system should
> have some kind of DB that holds that information.
> 3: Well, it's a 3rd party application that - in theory - should take
> care of removing old fil
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:21:54 +0200, Daniel Troeder wrote:
> There is also the possibility to write a really small daemon (less than
> 50 lines of C) that registers with inotify for the entire fs and
> journals the file activity to a sqlite-db.
sys-process/incron ?
--
Neil Bothwick
A friend of
Am 14.08.2012 11:46, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:21:54 +0200, Daniel Troeder wrote:
>
>> There is also the possibility to write a really small daemon (less than
>> 50 lines of C) that registers with inotify for the entire fs and
>> journals the file activity to a sqlite-db.
>
On 14.08.2012 11:46, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:21:54 +0200, Daniel Troeder wrote:
>
>> There is also the possibility to write a really small daemon (less than
>> 50 lines of C) that registers with inotify for the entire fs and
>> journals the file activity to a sqlite-db.
>
>
Am 13.08.2012 20:18, schrieb Michael Hampicke:
> Am 13.08.2012 19:14, schrieb Florian Philipp:
>> Am 13.08.2012 16:52, schrieb Michael Mol:
>>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Michael Hampicke
>>> mailto:mgehampi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Have you indexed your ext4 partition?
>>>
>>>
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
>
> What a pity though -- you just don't get 1400x1050 laptops anymore these days
> (or any 4:3 laptops for that matter).
I also have a 1400x1050 (15-inch screen) laptop and I think this
resolution and screen size are hitting the sweet-sp
Am 14.08.2012 15:54, schrieb Daniel Troeder:
> On 14.08.2012 11:46, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:21:54 +0200, Daniel Troeder wrote:
>>
>>> There is also the possibility to write a really small daemon (less than
>>> 50 lines of C) that registers with inotify for the entire fs and
>
Am 14.08.2012 17:09, schrieb Florian Philipp:
>
> Retrieving files created 30+ days ago:
> awk -v newest=$(date -d -5seconds +%s) '
> $1>newest{ nextfile }
> { print $3 }'
>
s/-5seconds/-30days/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 08/14/2012 04:07:39 AM, Adam Carter wrote:
> I think btrfs probably is meant to provide a lot of the modern
> features like reiser4 or xfs
Unfortunately btrfs is still generally slower than ext4 for example.
Checkout http://openbenchmarking.org/, eg
http://openbenchmarking.org/s/ext4%20btrfs
On Aug 14, 2012 11:42 PM, "Helmut Jarausch"
wrote:
>
> On 08/14/2012 04:07:39 AM, Adam Carter wrote:
>>
>> > I think btrfs probably is meant to provide a lot of the modern
>> > features like reiser4 or xfs
>>
>> Unfortunately btrfs is still generally slower than ext4 for example.
>> Checkout http:
Sure, but wouldn't compression make write operations slower? And isn't he
looking for performance?
On Aug 14, 2012 1:14 PM, "Pandu Poluan" wrote:
>
> On Aug 14, 2012 11:42 PM, "Helmut Jarausch"
> wrote:
> >
> > On 08/14/2012 04:07:39 AM, Adam Carter wrote:
> >>
> >> > I think btrfs probably is
Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 13:21:35 schrieb Jason Weisberger:
> Sure, but wouldn't compression make write operations slower? And isn't he
> looking for performance?
not really. As long as the CPU can compress faster than the disk can write
stuff.
More interessting: is btrfs trying to be smar
Am 14.08.2012 16:00, schrieb Florian Philipp:
> Am 13.08.2012 20:18, schrieb Michael Hampicke:
>> Am 13.08.2012 19:14, schrieb Florian Philipp:
>>> Am 13.08.2012 16:52, schrieb Michael Mol:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Michael Hampicke
mailto:mgehampi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 15. August 2012, 00:05:40 schrieb Pandu Poluan:
>
> Are the support tools for btrfs (fsck, defrag, etc.) already complete?
no
--
#163933
Am 14.08.2012 10:21, schrieb Daniel Troeder:
> On 13.08.2012 16:53, Michael Hampicke wrote:
>> 2012/8/13 Daniel Troeder > 3rd thought: purging old files with "find"? your cache system should
>> have some kind of DB that holds that information.
>> 3: Well, it's a 3rd party application that -
Am 14.08.2012 19:21, schrieb Jason Weisberger:
> Sure, but wouldn't compression make write operations slower? And isn't he
> looking for performance?
> On Aug 14, 2012 1:14 PM, "Pandu Poluan" wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2012 11:42 PM, "Helmut Jarausch"
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/14/2012 04:07:39 AM,
Am 14.08.2012 19:42, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
> Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 13:21:35 schrieb Jason Weisberger:
>> Sure, but wouldn't compression make write operations slower? And isn't he
>> looking for performance?
>
> not really. As long as the CPU can compress faster than the disk can w
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>
> On Aug 14, 2012 11:42 PM, "Helmut Jarausch"
> wrote:
>>
>> On 08/14/2012 04:07:39 AM, Adam Carter wrote:
>>>
>>> > I think btrfs probably is meant to provide a lot of the modern
>>> > features like reiser4 or xfs
>>>
>>> Unfortunately btrf
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Michael Hampicke wrote:
> Am 14.08.2012 19:42, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
>> Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 13:21:35 schrieb Jason Weisberger:
>>> Sure, but wouldn't compression make write operations slower? And isn't he
>>> looking for performance?
>>
>> not r
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Alecks Gates wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Michael Hampicke
> wrote:
> > Am 14.08.2012 19:42, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
> >> Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 13:21:35 schrieb Jason Weisberger:
> >>> Sure, but wouldn't compression make write operatio
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Alecks Gates wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Michael Hampicke
>> wrote:
>> > Am 14.08.2012 19:42, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
>> >> Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 13:21:35 schrieb Jason Weisber
Hi guys, after quick read about ssd, I have a couple of question:
1. My friend have new server with a ssd installed. He plan to RHEL 5.7
(I don't know why he choose this) on it. On redhat website, it say
something like this:
"However, if the device does not export topology information, Red Hat
reco
27 matches
Mail list logo
