How do I install linux on a hp compaq t5520? My advise is to keep as it as and don't format and use live cd's by which you can run virtually. Without installing. Install Php Mbstring Extension Debian Server there.

You can subscribe to this list. On 01:21, rkwesk_ltsp wrote: >>As the switch's port to the client is also 100 Mps I think the client's >100mps nic cannot be overloaded >per se. However, a fellow member of this list, alkisg, has since >explained to me that the buffer on the >switch will fill up since it is receiving packets from its giga port >but can only release them at its >100 mbps port. It was this phenomenon (is it called buffer overrun?) >that I hadn't thought about. This >then forces the switch to send a pause frame to the server (in order >for its buffer to be relieved.) Yes, exactly.

I wouldn't call it buffer overrun - that would imply a programming bug. The buffer just gets full. >Now I will show complete ignorance by asking whether if in fact the >overload occurs even sooner (or more often) >if an all giga switch were in place of the above described switch and >the bottleneck was the 100 mbps nic rather >than the 100 mbps port on the above switch? Whether it is a 100Mb port or a gigabit port operating at 100Mb does not make a difference. The bottleneck will be the switch port (not the NIC!) that cannot get the data out as fast as the gigabit port gets new data in.

On 2:12 PM, Alkis Georgopoulos wrote: >Στις 08:37 μμ, ο/η John Hupp έγραψε: >>But I have not been able to get LTSP to work with any of the mainline >>kernels I tested: 3.10.1, 3.9.6, 3.8.13, 3.7.5, 3.6.3 all fail. Telecharger Driver Hp Carte Graphique Vga Standard Windows 7 here. >LTSP in Ubuntu is using overlayfs or aufs, and noone of them is >mainlined yet, so you can't use a mainline kernel to test LTSP. >>Just test NBD, don't involve LTSP or netbooting in your tests.

>>Also note that I've seen a problem where NBD wouldn't work for some >specific NICs unless I set mtu to 1492 instead of the default 1500. >>>Wishes for a happy new year to everyone, >Alkis Thanks for the big clues! Attachments: Hi all, I'm having a problem installing LTSP on LM16 (MATE). Having followed I did: sudo ltsp-build-client --dist=saucy This builds the thin client image and the test machine boots it and it seems to run fine. However, I want to use fat clients so I did: sudo ltsp-build-client --fat-client --dist=saucy This also builds fine but the client boots and loads the standard Ubuntu unity desktop and it's also so slow that it's unusable. Does anyone know what I need to do to get a correct fat client image please?

Many thanks, NTB. On 2013-12-28 22:18, Jakob Unterwurzacher wrote: >On 12:18, rkwesk_ltsp wrote: >>I thought I had this figured out but I'd like to confirm: >>>>Configuration 1 >>>>unmanaged switch w 1 giga port and 16 100 ports not connected >>directly >>w router >>Server with two nics, one gigabit to giga port on switch and one 100 >>bit to router directly. >>Clients, mixed thin and fat but all with 100 bit nics to same switch >>to >>100 bit ports. >>>>Configuration 2 >>>>unmanaged switch w 1 giga port and 16 100 ports, one of 100 bit >>ports >>connected w router >>Server with one nic (giga) to giga port on switch >>Clients, mixed thin and fat but all with 100 bit nics to same switch >>to >>100 bit ports. >>>>In both cases (I think) there should be no overload and so the >>possible >>complications with flow control are avoided. >>>>Is this correct?

>>No, I think you will experience head-of-line blocking if the switch >has >flow control enabled. >>Most of the traffic in LTSP is from the server to the clients. Say a >client watches an HD youtube video. This will easily generate more >than >100Mb/s of traffic and will overload the client's 100Mb/s port. As the switch's port to the client is also 100 Mps I think the client's 100mps nic cannot be overloaded per se. However, a fellow member of this list, alkisg, has since explained to me that the buffer on the switch will fill up since it is receiving packets from its giga port but can only release them at its 100 mbps port.

It was this phenomenon (is it called buffer overrun?) that I hadn't thought about. This then forces the switch to send a pause frame to the server (in order for its buffer to be relieved.) Thus what you explain below here still happens.:(( >The >switch will send pause frames to the server, effectively throttling >down >it's 1Gb/s port to a slower speed. This will unnecessarily >affect all other clients' traffic, too - this is what is called >head-of-line blocking.