7%
27.06.2014
the ability to claim additional CPU cycles for itself. You don't want to have to trust user code. On the other hand, allowing user code to yield CPU cycles to another process is perfectly fine. User code can
7%
26.01.2016
for the MongoDB database name that you want to use. If you are installing on a single server, the defaults are fine. At the end, Pritunl writes its own pritunl.conf based on your details. All told, the entire
7%
28.08.2014
as a module. He said:
Please, no. "Just say m if you don't know" was fine in the late 90s, when Linux was mostly x86. You could afford including 3% of useless drivers, and people working on other architectures
7%
02.04.2014
_find_alias() is not correct or sufficient either. It can work in practice (and probably does perfectly fine 99.9% of the time), but it can equally well give the *wrong* dentry: yes, the dentry it returns would have been
7%
19.08.2016
other clients from accessing the same file.
As long as the process is limited to a single instance of Samba, everything works fine: The single Samba server can reliably assume that its version of locking
7%
27.10.2016
written). That's fine; the question is what the caller can count upon
wrt shortening.
Again, we are *not* guaranteed writing up to [an] exact boundary. However, the current implementation will end up
7%
17.11.2016
, this has per-user resource management, which guarantees that at least the system won't run out of memory. Good. The act of sending a message transfers the resource to the receiver end. Fine.
However
7%
03.01.2017
if you are only using two hard disk drives or SSDs, so you can add both internal media to the storage pool.
In most cases, the default installation should work fine: Server systems rarely use extremely
7%
03.02.2017
some fine-tuning, however, you have various options.
First, if you don't want to use the existing config file from your /boot directory but would rather generate a fresh (default) one, enter:
make
7%
09.07.2017
not encourage architectures to do things that simply won't matter."
Meanwhile, Martin Schwidefsky tested Al's patch on the S/390 architecture and found that it worked fine, except for one bug, which he patched
