Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[fam\]\s+fam\s+\/\s+imon\s+linux\s+2\.4\.10\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[fam\]\s+fam\s+\/\s+imon\s+linux\s+2\.4\.10\s*$/: 32 ]

Total 32 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Michael Wardle <michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 15:26:29 +1000; The FAM files, the RPMs in particular, we (SGI) have provided were designed for older systems which used inetd rather than xinetd (such as Red Hat Linux 6.x). Many persons have made patches to fix bu; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00014.html (9,760 bytes)
2. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Michael Wardle <michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 15:46:55 +1000; Hi John. I would suggest starting with the contributed 2.4.7 kernel patch that can be found here (attached to the bug): <URL:http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83> It is highly likely that t; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00015.html (9,586 bytes)
3. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Jerome De Greef <jdegreef@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 18:28:54 +0200; Hi, Did you succeed applying this patch? It tries to completely remove the content of fs/filesystems.c. The 2.4.0 patch was adding a few line to this file. Jerome -- +--+ +--+ -- Source code, list ar; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00017.html (9,735 bytes)
4. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Tom Prado <tprado@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 13:35:53 -0400; Jerome De Greef wrote: * Michael Wardle (michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: Hi John. On Sun, 30 Sep 2001 03:06, John Gluck wrote: I wanted to try it out with a 2.4.10 kernel. After looking at the imon; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00018.html (10,361 bytes)
5. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Tom Prado <tprado@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 02:15:52 -0400; Jerome De Greef wrote: * Michael Wardle (michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: Hi John. On Sun, 30 Sep 2001 03:06, John Gluck wrote: I wanted to try it out with a 2.4.10 kernel. After looking at the imon; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00019.html (10,814 bytes)
6. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Alex Larsson <alexl@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:18:11 -0400 (EDT); Why do people continue to work on the imon patch? In what way do you think the current Linux directory notification is inadequate? (Except being a horrible interface, but that is all hidden by fam.); /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00020.html (9,903 bytes)
7. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: John Gluck <jgluckca@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:46:50 -0400; Hi Alex I am not familiar with what you are talking about but curious. Can you point me to some info??? John -- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/fam/ To unsubscribe:; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00021.html (9,174 bytes)
8. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Nathan Thompson-Amato <nathan.thompson-amato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 12:01:22 -0400; Alex Larsson wrote: Why do people continue to work on the imon patch? In what way do you think the current Linux directory notification is inadequate? (Except being a horrible interface, but that is; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00022.html (9,581 bytes)
9. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Jerome De Greef <jdegreef@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 18:07:00 +0200; It doesn't compile if you try to compile it inside the kernel. Here's the error I get: make -C imon make[2]: Entering directory `/mnt/src/kernel/linux-2.4.10-imon/fs/imon' make all_targets make[3]: E; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00023.html (11,940 bytes)
10. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Alex Larsson <alexl@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 15:50:37 -0400 (EDT); I have posted patches for supporting the native linux directory notification scheme (dnotify). They were posted on this mailing list, and you can get RPMs and SRPMS from RedHat rawhide. / Alex -- Sou; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00024.html (9,012 bytes)
11. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Alex Larsson <alexl@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 15:52:26 -0400 (EDT); It's just a patch. There has been no new fam releases for a long time. If you want a working fam + dnotify, the easiest way is to use the fam package from rawhide. If you don't run an xinetd + rpm ba; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00025.html (9,681 bytes)
12. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Nathan Thompson-Amato <nathan.thompson-amato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 16:42:44 -0400; Alex Larsson wrote: It's just a patch. There has been no new fam releases for a long time. If you want a working fam + dnotify, the easiest way is to use the fam package from rawhide. If you don't ru; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00026.html (9,553 bytes)
13. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Alex Larsson <alexl@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 17:43:08 -0400 (EDT); Do people routinely monitor files in over 8192 directories? If so, they can up the max, without even recompiling the kernel. / Alex -- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://oss.sgi.com/projects; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00027.html (9,466 bytes)
14. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Atif <aghaffar@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 02:42:28 +0200; Alex Larsson wrote: Do people routinely monitor files in over 8192 directories? If so, they can up the max, without even recompiling the kernel. Perhaps not routinely, not when FAM is used in GUI app; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00028.html (9,663 bytes)
15. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Tom Prado <tprado@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 02:49:34 -0400; Jerome De Greef wrote: * Tom Prado (tprado@xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: Jerome De Greef wrote: * Michael Wardle (michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: Hi John. On Sun, 30 Sep 2001 03:06, John Gluck wrote: I wante; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00031.html (12,096 bytes)
16. [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: John Gluck <jgluckca@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 13:06:20 -0400; I'm new to the fam/imon thing. I wanted to try it out with a 2.4.10 kernel. After looking at the imon patches for 2.4.0, I determined that it was all addded files except for namei.c which is patched; /archives/fam/2001-09/msg00008.html (6,515 bytes)
17. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Michael Wardle <michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 15:26:29 +1000; The FAM files, the RPMs in particular, we (SGI) have provided were designed for older systems which used inetd rather than xinetd (such as Red Hat Linux 6.x). Many persons have made patches to fix bu; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00052.html (9,896 bytes)
18. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Michael Wardle <michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 15:46:55 +1000; Hi John. I would suggest starting with the contributed 2.4.7 kernel patch that can be found here (attached to the bug): <URL:http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83> It is highly likely that t; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00053.html (9,737 bytes)
19. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Jerome De Greef <jdegreef@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 18:28:54 +0200; Hi, Did you succeed applying this patch? It tries to completely remove the content of fs/filesystems.c. The 2.4.0 patch was adding a few line to this file. Jerome -- +--+ +--+ -- Source code, list ar; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00055.html (9,930 bytes)
20. Re: [fam] fam / imon linux 2.4.10 (score: 1): Author: Tom Prado <tprado@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 13:35:53 -0400; Hi John. I wanted to try it out with a 2.4.10 kernel. After looking at the imon patches for 2.4.0, I determined that it was all addded files except for namei.c which is patched. I would suggest star; /archives/fam/2001-10/msg00056.html (10,397 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]