sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items
List archive
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?
- From: "M.L." <mlubrano AT sourcemage.org>
- To: sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?
- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:37:25 +0100
Hi,
postfix 2.0.0.2 will be on next devel grimoire update... (already in cvs).
Bye,
Mat.
On Lundi 6 Janvier 2003 05:57, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
> Perl has DB_File included which doesn't work with 4.0 version of DB. My
> 2.5.54 is OK (everything works) except for the /dev/shm which can't be
> mounted (filesystem not supported by the kernel is the error message). I
> had kernel panic: VFS unable to mount device 303 (03:03), but I found
> out that disabling "generic support for PCI IDE controllers" or some
> such, fixes this. I also think that devfs mounts itself onto /dev even
> with "devfs=nomount", but I didn't check that.
>
> Robin Cook wrote:
> > Don't have Postfix installed on this system and don't use perl much so
> > haven't seen any problems with them. I am only able to use the ac
> > kernels because of the extra ATA-133 IDE card I have and unable to get
> > 2.5.x kernel to compile here with the modules I need. Is there some
> > reason perl doesn't show up depending (even optionally) on db?
> > CuZnDragon
> > Robin Cook
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Grimoire mailing list
> SM-Grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-grimoire
--
//
// M.L. Grimoire Guru (mail & news)
// SourceMage GNU/Linux http://www.sourcemage.org
// ICQ #23832402 Linux User #36502
//
-
[SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
M.L., 01/02/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Eric Sandall, 01/02/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?, M.L., 01/02/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?, Pierre Abbat, 01/02/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/05/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Robin Cook, 01/05/2003
-
[SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/05/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Robin Cook, 01/05/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/05/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?, M.L., 01/08/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/05/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Robin Cook, 01/05/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?, M.L., 01/06/2003
-
[SM-Grimoire] Berkeley DB 4.1 migration; WAS: Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/05/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?, M.L., 01/06/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Robin Cook, 01/05/2003
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Dufflebunk, 01/02/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?, Pierre Abbat, 01/02/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Ready for postfix 2.0 ?,
Eric Sandall, 01/02/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.