Menu
▾
▴
devil-linux-develop — developer discussions
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2001 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(55) |
Oct
(44) |
Nov
(156) |
Dec
(123) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 |
Jan
(130) |
Feb
(156) |
Mar
(162) |
Apr
(171) |
May
(97) |
Jun
(127) |
Jul
(58) |
Aug
(81) |
Sep
(86) |
Oct
(45) |
Nov
(41) |
Dec
(84) |
| 2003 |
Jan
(71) |
Feb
(87) |
Mar
(133) |
Apr
(152) |
May
(151) |
Jun
(232) |
Jul
(320) |
Aug
(237) |
Sep
(271) |
Oct
(536) |
Nov
(301) |
Dec
(393) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(393) |
Feb
(184) |
Mar
(314) |
Apr
(225) |
May
(139) |
Jun
(77) |
Jul
(87) |
Aug
(75) |
Sep
(139) |
Oct
(50) |
Nov
(8) |
Dec
(28) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(66) |
Feb
(63) |
Mar
(14) |
Apr
(14) |
May
(8) |
Jun
(23) |
Jul
(21) |
Aug
(6) |
Sep
(29) |
Oct
(55) |
Nov
(38) |
Dec
(8) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(15) |
May
(32) |
Jun
(44) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(14) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
(2) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(35) |
Aug
(49) |
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(42) |
Nov
(44) |
Dec
(7) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
(7) |
Mar
(8) |
Apr
(80) |
May
(74) |
Jun
(29) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(7) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(19) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(24) |
May
(22) |
Jun
(23) |
Jul
(8) |
Aug
(23) |
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(27) |
Nov
(52) |
Dec
(27) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(36) |
Feb
(29) |
Mar
(17) |
Apr
(28) |
May
(21) |
Jun
(4) |
Jul
|
Aug
(28) |
Sep
(18) |
Oct
(6) |
Nov
(34) |
Dec
(16) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(18) |
Feb
(12) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(9) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(16) |
Nov
(26) |
Dec
(17) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(34) |
Mar
(52) |
Apr
(10) |
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(4) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(5) |
May
(4) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(14) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(11) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2018 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Serge L. <fi...@in...> - 2005-08-24 13:23:03
|
Dear Heiko, Friday, July 29, 2005, 7:18:38 PM, you wrote: >> I'm sorry, but I don't check rtos patches with grsec because I don't >> use grsec in my servers. I check that pax patch has a several rejects after >> rtos apply. If it's interesting for anybody I'll try to apply rtos and >> grsec simultaneously. Theoretically, there is no reason for any >> incompatibles in these patches. > Yes please try if they work together. > Otherwise you'll have to add some logic into the menuconfig part, so you > can't select rtos together with grsec (which is very easy). I'm sorry again for so long term of answer writing. There are some troubles happened. So, abt grsec. I haven't done it because grsec patch trys to modify sched.c file which was completely rewritten by rtos patch. Now, I've got a little changed grsec patch which produces rejects into 2 files: the first - in Makefile (in version string) - it's easy the second - 4 rejects in sched.c file. It's a seriously.... If anybody is interested into modified patch I'll send it directly because of its size... -- Best regards, Serge mailto:fi...@in... |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2005-08-11 12:09:08
|
Feature Requests item #1256650, was opened at 2005-08-11 08:09 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=410646&aid=1256650&group_id=34096 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Base System Group: None Status: Open Priority: 5 Submitted By: Bruce Smith (blubdog) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Add FreeRADIUS Initial Comment: Add the Radius server: FreeRADIUS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=410646&aid=1256650&group_id=34096 |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-07-29 15:19:37
|
On Fri, July 29, 2005 05:42, Serge Leschinsky wrote: > Dear Heiko, > > > Thursday, July 28, 2005, 5:56:42 PM, you wrote: > > > HZ> OK this sounds like it's worth including it. > HZ> Does it only work without the grsec patch? > HZ> If yes, maybe Bruce wants to include it for the server version? > I'm sorry, but I don't check rtos patches with grsec because I don't > use grsec in my servers. I check that pax patch has a several rejects after > rtos apply. If it's interesting for anybody I'll try to apply rtos and > grsec simultaneously. Theoretically, there is no reason for any > incompatibles in these patches. Yes please try if they work together. Otherwise you'll have to add some logic into the menuconfig part, so you can't select rtos together with grsec (which is very easy). -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Serge L. <se...@nn...> - 2005-07-29 11:07:42
|
Dear Heiko, Thursday, July 28, 2005, 5:56:42 PM, you wrote: HZ> OK this sounds like it's worth including it. HZ> Does it only work without the grsec patch? HZ> If yes, maybe Bruce wants to include it for the server version? I'm sorry, but I don't check rtos patches with grsec because I don't use grsec in my servers. I check that pax patch has a several rejects after rtos apply. If it's interesting for anybody I'll try to apply rtos and grsec simultaneously. Theoretically, there is no reason for any incompatibles in these patches. -- Best regards, Serge mailto:se...@nn... |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2005-07-28 14:39:05
|
> > Some information abt RTOS and these patches: > > http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT8906594941.html > > OK this sounds like it's worth including it. > Does it only work without the grsec patch? > If yes, maybe Bruce wants to include it for the server version? Sure, as long as it works without grsec. - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-07-28 14:01:22
|
On Thu, July 28, 2005 01:51, Serge Leschinsky wrote: > Dear Heiko, > > > Wednesday, July 27, 2005, 9:21:12 PM, you wrote: > > >>>> Without Perf patch | With Perf patch >>>> max: 93.7898s | 21.2820s >>>> approx. 95 percentile: 61.2178s | 18.1917s | Threads fairness: >>>> | >>>> distributin: 45.45/79.44 | 100.00/100.00 >>>> execution: 42.06/78.00 | 99.62/99.93 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> The most interesting result is "approx. 95 percentile:", i.e. the >>> most evident time of thread execute. > > HZ> Are you sure you have the columns right? Right now it looks to me > like HZ> without the perf patch it's faster. > Yes, you are right. Without rtos patches kernel a bit faster, BUT > patched kernel more "threads fairness". The time of system reaction greatly > grows in the heavy loaded system, but with rtos patch time of reaction is > approximately constant. It's a quite logical - scheduler with taking > "priority" into consideration ( aka intellectual scheduler > ) is slower as simple scheduler because it must check more conditions > before switch task. But take a closer look on the test results - without > patch max time of thread execution is 93s, patched - only 21s. As I said > in my previous message, the most interesting result is "approx. 95 > percentile": with > the probability of 95% the time of test thread execution is 18s in the > patched system and 61s in the doesn't patched system. It's a serious > difference, I suppose, especially for applications with strong time > dependence (VoIP for a example). > > Some information abt RTOS and these patches: > http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT8906594941.html OK this sounds like it's worth including it. Does it only work without the grsec patch? If yes, maybe Bruce wants to include it for the server version? -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Serge L. <se...@nn...> - 2005-07-28 06:52:22
|
Dear Heiko, Wednesday, July 27, 2005, 9:21:12 PM, you wrote: >>> Without Perf patch | With Perf patch >>> max: 93.7898s | 21.2820s >>> approx. 95 percentile: 61.2178s | 18.1917s | >>> Threads fairness: | >>> distributin: 45.45/79.44 | 100.00/100.00 >>> execution: 42.06/78.00 | 99.62/99.93 >>> >> >> The most interesting result is "approx. 95 percentile:", i.e. the >> most evident time of thread execute. HZ> Are you sure you have the columns right? Right now it looks to me like HZ> without the perf patch it's faster. Yes, you are right. Without rtos patches kernel a bit faster, BUT patched kernel more "threads fairness". The time of system reaction greatly grows in the heavy loaded system, but with rtos patch time of reaction is approximately constant. It's a quite logical - scheduler with taking "priority" into consideration ( aka intellectual scheduler ) is slower as simple scheduler because it must check more conditions before switch task. But take a closer look on the test results - without patch max time of thread execution is 93s, patched - only 21s. As I said in my previous message, the most interesting result is "approx. 95 percentile": with the probability of 95% the time of test thread execution is 18s in the patched system and 61s in the doesn't patched system. It's a serious difference, I suppose, especially for applications with strong time dependence (VoIP for a example). Some information abt RTOS and these patches: http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT8906594941.html -- Best regards, Serge mailto:se...@nn... |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-07-27 17:21:41
|
On Wed, July 27, 2005 08:46, Serge Leschinsky wrote: > Dear Sirs, > > > Saturday, July 23, 2005, 1:35:54 PM, you wrote: > > > SL> it. Unfortunately vhz patch and performance patch are incompatible > SL> now. > I've forgotten to say I applied this performance patch without PAX and > grsecurity. I've tested my system by SysBench (system performance > benchmark, http://sysbench.sourceforge.net/) with performance patch and > without it. > >> # ./sysbench --num-threads=500 --max-requests=10000 --test=threads >> run sysbench v0.4.0: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark >> >> Running the test with following options: >> Number of threads: 500 >> >> >> Doing thread subsystem performance test >> Thread yields per test: 1000 Locks used: 8 >> Threads started! >> Done. >> > Without Perf patch | With Perf patch > | > >> Test execution summary: | >> total time: 236.9318s | 359.9786s total number of >> events: 10000 | 10000 >> total time taken by | event execution: >> 113411.5786 | 179826.3306 >> per-request statistics: | min: >> 0.0010s | 13.8871s >> avg: 11.3412s | 17.9826s >> max: 93.7898s | 21.2820s >> approx. 95 percentile: 61.2178s | 18.1917s | >> Threads fairness: | >> distributin: 45.45/79.44 | 100.00/100.00 >> execution: 42.06/78.00 | 99.62/99.93 >> > > The most interesting result is "approx. 95 percentile:", i.e. the > most evident time of thread execute. Are you sure you have the columns right? Right now it looks to me like without the perf patch it's faster. (It could also be that I can't think straight, because I had too much for lunch) -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Serge L. <se...@nn...> - 2005-07-27 16:39:54
|
Dear Sirs, Saturday, July 23, 2005, 1:35:54 PM, you wrote: SL> it. Unfortunately vhz patch and performance patch are incompatible SL> now. I've forgotten to say I applied this performance patch without PAX and grsecurity. I've tested my system by SysBench (system performance benchmark, http://sysbench.sourceforge.net/) with performance patch and without it. ># ./sysbench --num-threads=500 --max-requests=10000 --test=threads run >sysbench v0.4.0: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark > >Running the test with following options: >Number of threads: 500 > >Doing thread subsystem performance test >Thread yields per test: 1000 Locks used: 8 >Threads started! >Done. Without Perf patch | With Perf patch | >Test execution summary: | > total time: 236.9318s | 359.9786s > total number of events: 10000 | 10000 > total time taken by | > event execution: 113411.5786 | 179826.3306 > per-request statistics: | > min: 0.0010s | 13.8871s > avg: 11.3412s | 17.9826s > max: 93.7898s | 21.2820s > approx. 95 percentile: 61.2178s | 18.1917s > | >Threads fairness: | > distributin: 45.45/79.44 | 100.00/100.00 > execution: 42.06/78.00 | 99.62/99.93 The most interesting result is "approx. 95 percentile:", i.e. the most evident time of thread execute. -- Best regards, Serge mailto:se...@nn... |
|
From: Serge L. <se...@nn...> - 2005-07-23 09:39:13
|
Dear Sirs, I've done a performance patch for DL 1.2.6 (2.4.31 kernel). It's based on Con Kolivas patches and composed of batch O(1) scheduler, kernel preemption patch (Robert Love), low latency patch, CK interactivity and read Latency2 patch (read into a heavy writing system). I haven't add a Variable HZ patch yet, but I'm going to do it. Unfortunately vhz patch and performance patch are incompatible now. Also I suggest to add Con Kolivas schedtool to DL. > schedtool can be used to query or alter a process' scheduling policy > under linux (http://freequaos.host.sk/schedtool/ - web page, http://freequaos.host.sk/schedtool/schedtool-1.2.5.tar.bz2 ) PS. The /etc/sysctl.conf is absent now. But for enabling low latency we have set /proc/sys/kernel/lowlatency to "1" or delete "CONFIG_LOLAT_SYSCTL=y" from config_linux.lowlat -- Best regards, Serge mailto:se...@nn... |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-07-22 13:35:24
|
On Thu, July 21, 2005 23:28, Martin Glazer wrote: > On July 21, 2005 08:08, Heiko Zuerker wrote: > >> On Wed, July 20, 2005 22:47, Martin Glazer wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> 2 Questions regarding Net::DNS - >>> >>> >>> >>> Net-DNS is listed twice in build/scripts/config/perl-ext and appears >>> to cause it to be compiled twice - any particular reason? >> >> Me not paying attention ? ;-) >> > > It happens... > > >> >>> DL is using version 0.24 and the latest released version is 0.52 - >>> can we upgrade? >> >> I think I had problems doing it and then forgott about it. >> You can give it a shot if you want. >> > > 0.52 compiled fine although it mentioned that a prerequisite was missing, > namely Digest::HMAC_MD5 (missing in 0.34 as well) and Net::IP - I'm not > sure if these are really required or not. Otherwise compiles and installs > fine - I don't have enough knowledge of perl to actually test if it worked > OK. > > > Is there anyway to configure the build order of the perl modules? That's the purpose of the build/scripts/config/perl-ext file. The modules are compiled in the order they're in there. Of course, any new modules have to be added there. -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Martin G. <sou...@gl...> - 2005-07-22 04:28:25
|
On July 21, 2005 08:08, Heiko Zuerker wrote: > On Wed, July 20, 2005 22:47, Martin Glazer wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > 2 Questions regarding Net::DNS - > > > > > > Net-DNS is listed twice in build/scripts/config/perl-ext and appears to > > cause it to be compiled twice - any particular reason? > > Me not paying attention ? ;-) It happens... > > > DL is using version 0.24 and the latest released version is 0.52 - can > > we upgrade? > > I think I had problems doing it and then forgott about it. > You can give it a shot if you want. 0.52 compiled fine although it mentioned that a prerequisite was missing, namely Digest::HMAC_MD5 (missing in 0.34 as well) and Net::IP - I'm not sure if these are really required or not. Otherwise compiles and installs fine - I don't have enough knowledge of perl to actually test if it worked OK. Is there anyway to configure the build order of the perl modules? Thanks Martin |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-07-21 14:10:55
|
On Wed, July 20, 2005 22:47, Martin Glazer wrote: > Hi, > > > 2 Questions regarding Net::DNS - > > > Net-DNS is listed twice in build/scripts/config/perl-ext and appears to > cause it to be compiled twice - any particular reason? Me not paying attention ? ;-) > DL is using version 0.24 and the latest released version is 0.52 - can > we upgrade? I think I had problems doing it and then forgott about it. You can give it a shot if you want. -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Martin G. <sou...@gl...> - 2005-07-21 03:48:08
|
Hi, 2 Questions regarding Net::DNS - Net-DNS is listed twice in build/scripts/config/perl-ext and appears to cause it to be compiled twice - any particular reason? DL is using version 0.24 and the latest released version is 0.52 - can we upgrade? Thx Martin |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-07-20 19:36:16
|
On Wed, July 20, 2005 13:41, Martin Glazer wrote: > Hi, > > > With the latest stunnel, they have changed the option for tcp wrappers > support. > > From the Changelog.. > Version 4.11, 2005.07.09, urgency: MEDIUM: > * New features > - New ./configure option --with-threads to select thread model. > - ./configure option --with-tcp-wrappers renamed to --disable-libwrap. > I hope the meaning of the option is much more clear, now. > > > The build fails if TCP_WRAPPERS is not selected on DL. > > > I have modified stunnel script to check for this option and add the > correct configuration parameter. I also left in some stuff which had been > commented out - you could probably remove this if not needed anymore. Patch is applied. Thanks ! -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Martin G. <sou...@gl...> - 2005-07-20 18:41:10
|
Hi,
With the latest stunnel, they have changed the option for tcp wrappers=20
support.
=46rom the Changelog..
Version 4.11, 2005.07.09, urgency: MEDIUM:
* New features
- New ./configure option --with-threads to select thread model.
- ./configure option --with-tcp-wrappers renamed to --disable-libwrap.
I hope the meaning of the option is much more clear, now.
The build fails if TCP_WRAPPERS is not selected on DL.
I have modified stunnel script to check for this option and add the correct=
=20
configuration parameter. I also left in some stuff which had been commented=
=20
out - you could probably remove this if not needed anymore.
diff attached.
Martin
|
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-07-19 02:37:26
|
On Mon, July 11, 2005 11:12, Martin Glazer wrote: > Hi, > > > Small request to please add Date-Calc > (http://search.cpan.org/dist/Date-Calc/) > to an upcoming version of Devil. > > I found a great little script for summarizing Postfix logs > (http://jimsun.linxnet.com/postfix_contrib.html) but it requires the perl > Date-Calc module. It's added. -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2005-07-18 14:39:42
|
Feature Requests item #1240295, was opened at 2005-07-18 10:39 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=410646&aid=1240295&group_id=34096 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Packages Group: None Status: Open Priority: 5 Submitted By: Bruce Smith (blubdog) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Make MySQL & Postgres run out of the box Initial Comment: Enhance the init.d scripts, so that if MySQL or PostgreSQL are started for the very first time, initialize a default database so the backend will start and allow users to add their own databases. (like the major distro's do) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=410646&aid=1240295&group_id=34096 |
|
From: Martin G. <sou...@gl...> - 2005-07-11 16:14:12
|
Hi, Small request to please add Date-Calc (http://search.cpan.org/dist/Date-Calc/) to an upcoming version of Devil. I found a great little script for summarizing Postfix logs (http://jimsun.linxnet.com/postfix_contrib.html) but it requires the perl Date-Calc module. Thanks Martin |
|
From: Andrea F. <af...@fa...> - 2005-07-02 08:55:08
|
Heiko Zuerker wrote: > Yes I think this would be a good addition to DL. > > Please follow these instructions on how to submit patches: > http://www.devil-linux.org/documentation/1.2.x/ch03s03.html > > > Ok, let me know if this is ok, you'll find the patch file in attachment. I have obtained this from cvs rdiff, it's in unified format. I have added also a little modification in the eagle-usb init script, because without this mod I was unable to have the adsl connection setup at boot (I am using pppoa). I have used version 5.21.4.10.8 from http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/tools/?M=D Andrea |
|
From: Andrea F. <af...@fa...> - 2005-07-02 08:45:24
|
Heiko Zuerker wrote: >Yes I think this would be a good addition to DL. > >Please follow these instructions on how to submit patches: >http://www.devil-linux.org/documentation/1.2.x/ch03s03.html > > > Ok, let me know if this is ok, you'll find the patch file in attachment. I have obtained this from cvs rdiff, it's in unified format. I have added also a little modification in the eagle-usb init script, because without this mod I was unable to have the adsl connection setup at boot (I am using pppoa). I have used version 5.21.4.10.8 from http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/tools/?M=D Andrea -- Andrea Fino 8-) - "Sistemi su misura di qualita' industriale" "Handcrafted systems with industrial quality" [Phone: +39 071 2070104]+[Fax: +39 071 2077919]+[iaxtel:17002876594] [Web: http://www.faino.it ]+[Email: af...@fa... ] |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-07-01 19:29:06
|
> Hi to all, > > > I have added growisofs to dl, may be insteresting for others to have it? > > > I am planning some others packages, as well. > > > If the response is positive which is the best way to give back > mods/scripts? Yes I think this would be a good addition to DL. Please follow these instructions on how to submit patches: http://www.devil-linux.org/documentation/1.2.x/ch03s03.html -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Andrea F. <af...@fa...> - 2005-07-01 15:16:06
|
Hi to all, I have added growisofs to dl, may be insteresting for others to have it? I am planning some others packages, as well. If the response is positive which is the best way to give back mods/scripts? Regards, Andrea Fino |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2005-06-23 17:14:12
|
> >Is there any interest in adding Pound ( http://www.apsis.ch/pound/) to DL? > > > >I've already created the scripts and build for myself, just haven't moved it > >into a chroot yet. > > > >I'm planning on using it as a front end for MS Exchange Outlook Web Access. > > > Sounds interesting, doing the chroot part shouldn't be to hard. > > You got my blessing, now you just need to confince Bruce. ;-) I don't have any use for something like that (at this time anyway). But I don't have anything against adding it either, so go ahead! :-) - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2005-06-23 16:57:36
|
Martin Glazer wrote: >Hey All, > >Is there any interest in adding Pound ( http://www.apsis.ch/pound/) to DL? > >I've already created the scripts and build for myself, just haven't moved it >into a chroot yet. > >I'm planning on using it as a front end for MS Exchange Outlook Web Access. > >From the website... > > > [................] Sounds interesting, doing the chroot part shouldn't be to hard. You got my blessing, now you just need to confince Bruce. ;-) -- Regards Heiko http://www.devil-linux.org |
35 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
