Search Results

Search found 10748 results on 430 pages for 'disk encryption'.

Page 7/430 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • Encryption over gigabit carrier ethernet

    - by Roy
    I would like to encrypt traffic between two data centres. Communication between the sites is provided as a standard provider bridge (s-vlan/802.1ad), so that our local vlan tags (c-vlan/802.1q) are preserved on the trunk. The communication traverse several layer 2 hops in the provider network. Border switches on both sides are Catalyst 3750-X with the MACSec service module, but I assume MACSec is out of the question, as I don't see any way to ensure L2 equality between the switches over a trunk, although it may be possible over a provider bridge. MPLS (using EoMPLS) would certainly allow this option, but is not available in this case. Either way, equipment can always be replaced to accommodate technology and topology choices. How do I go about finding viable technology options that can provide layer 2 point-to-point encryption over ethernet carrier networks?

    Read the article

  • What does the NTFS encryption protect against?

    - by Ray
    I have encrypted a folder from the (PropertiesAdvancedEncrypt contents to secure data). However when I change my user profile to another one which is also an administrator the folder seems to be accessible as if nothing happened. What exactly does this encryption protect against. I'm looking to encrypt folders that no other user, or another OS or even if the HDD were to be removed and plugged to another device will be accessible. My OS is Windows 7 Ultimate. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Encryption container for multiple people

    - by Adam M.
    I was just wondering if anyone may have come across a product that would allow for a container based encryption to be used by multiple people, in a Windows Server setup. I wanted to see if there might be something like a truecrypt that could handle being accessed by two accounts? Looking to see if there is a product that would have such properties that would allow only a hand full of users access to the content of the location, but allow for the files to be backed up a normal backup system. That way if a file had to be restored, the container could be redirected to another location for one of the users to get access to it? This would allow for access to be restricted beyond the NTFS and file share permissons

    Read the article

  • Recovering from apt-get upgrade gone wrong due to a full disk

    - by Peter
    I was performing an apt-get upgrade on an Ubuntu 12.04.5 LTS box that hadn't been updated in a little while and the upgrade failed due to 'No space left on device'. After a little while I worked out space meant inodes and I have freed some up but unfortunately things have been left something askew. I have tried manually installing the old versions of packages mentioned using dpkg -i but that doesn't help. I have tried apt-get upgrade and apt-get -f install to no avail. Results are below. Any ideas how to fix things up? FIXED: Installing the earlier versions again manually via dpkg -i and then apt-get -f install has done the trick. Not sure why this didn't work the first time. The packages in question are listed below but they will presumably vary. libssl1.0.0_1.0.1-4ubuntu5.14_i386.deb linux-headers-3.2.0-64-generic-pae_3.2.0-64.97_i386.deb linux-image-generic-pae_3.2.0.64.76_i386.deb linux-headers-3.2.0-64_3.2.0-64.97_all.deb linux-headers-generic-pae_3.2.0.64.76_i386.deb root@unlinked:/tmp# apt-get upgrade Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done You might want to run ‘apt-get -f install’ to correct these. The following packages have unmet dependencies. libssl-dev : Depends: libssl1.0.0 (= 1.0.1-4ubuntu5.14) but 1.0.1-4ubuntu5.17 is installed linux-generic-pae : Depends: linux-image-generic-pae (= 3.2.0.64.76) but 3.2.0.67.79 is installed Depends: linux-headers-generic-pae (= 3.2.0.64.76) but 3.2.0.67.79 is installed E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f. root@unlinked:/tmp# apt-get -f install Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Correcting dependencies... Done The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required: linux-headers-3.2.0-43-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-38-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-41-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-36-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-63-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-58-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-60-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-55-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-40 linux-headers-3.2.0-41 linux-headers-3.2.0-36 linux-headers-3.2.0-37 linux-headers-3.2.0-43 linux-headers-3.2.0-38 linux-headers-3.2.0-44 linux-headers-3.2.0-39 linux-headers-3.2.0-45 linux-headers-3.2.0-51 linux-headers-3.2.0-52 linux-headers-3.2.0-53 linux-headers-3.2.0-48 linux-headers-3.2.0-54 linux-headers-3.2.0-60 linux-headers-3.2.0-55 linux-headers-3.2.0-61 linux-headers-3.2.0-56 linux-headers-3.2.0-57 linux-headers-3.2.0-63 linux-headers-3.2.0-58 linux-headers-3.2.0-59 linux-headers-3.2.0-52-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-44-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-39-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-37-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-59-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-61-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-56-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-53-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-48-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-45-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-40-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-57-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-54-generic-pae linux-headers-3.2.0-51-generic-pae Use 'apt-get autoremove' to remove them. The following extra packages will be installed: libssl-dev linux-generic-pae The following packages will be upgraded: libssl-dev linux-generic-pae 2 to upgrade, 0 to newly install, 0 to remove and 0 not to upgrade. 2 not fully installed or removed. Need to get 0 B/1,427 kB of archives. After this operation, 1,024 B of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue [Y/n]? y dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libssl-dev: libssl-dev depends on libssl1.0.0 (= 1.0.1-4ubuntu5.14); however: Version of libssl1.0.0 on system is 1.0.1-4ubuntu5.17. dpkg: error processing libssl-dev (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured No apport report written because the error message indicates it's a follow-up error from a previous failure. dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-generic-pae: linux-generic-pae depends on linux-image-generic-pae (= 3.2.0.64.76); however: Version of linux-image-generic-pae on system is 3.2.0.67.79. linux-generic-pae depends on linux-headers-generic-pae (= 3.2.0.64.76); however: Version of linux-headers-generic-pae on system is 3.2.0.67.79. dpkg: error processing linux-generic-pae (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured No apport report written because the error message indicates it's a follow-up error from a previous failure. Errors were encountered while processing: libssl-dev linux-generic-pae E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

    Read the article

  • Time machine disk icon on boot disk

    - by Ben Lings
    The icon for Macintosh HD (my boot disk) shows as a Time Machine disk. There is a file .com.apple.timemachine.supported in the root of the disk. If I delete the file and restart the computer, the icon goes back to a normal HD icon. However, the .com.apple.timemachine.supported file is recreated at some point on boot because when I log in again, the file has been recreated. If then reboot again, the icon goes back to being a Time Machine one. Any ideas about what is creating this file and why? More importantly - how can I get it to stop? It looks like something thinks the boot disk should be a Time Machine volume, but what? Console.app shows the following messages at approximately hourly intervals: 19/01/2010 19:23:54 /System/Library/CoreServices/backupd[7459] Starting standard backup 19/01/2010 19:23:54 /System/Library/CoreServices/backupd[7459] Cookie file is not readable or does not exist at path: /.<12 hex digits of MAC address for en0> 19/01/2010 19:23:54 /System/Library/CoreServices/backupd[7459] Volume at path / does not appear to be the correct backup volume for this computer. (Cookies do not match) 19/01/2010 19:23:59 /System/Library/CoreServices/backupd[7459] Backup failed with error: 18 Other possibly relevant information: The boot HD isn't the original - the original failed so this is a SuperDuper'd clone of the original drive. I used to use the same disk for a SuperDuper clone as for Time Machine. These are the same same symptoms as this and this.

    Read the article

  • Use hard disk image like a regular hard disk on Linux

    - by jobnoorman
    If you have a hard disk image (including partition table, multiple partitions,...), is it possible to let Linux treat it as a regular hard disk? By "regular hard disk" I mean I would like to have the image show up as, for instance, /dev/hdx and its partitions as /dev/hdx1,... (I know I can mount one of the partitions in the image using "mount -o loop,offset=x ..." but I don't really like this option.)

    Read the article

  • Lost disk space in Windows 7, cannot find the missing

    - by Tsanders
    My hard drive is complaining it is low on disk space, but a strange thing seems to be happening: Explorer reports 10Gb of available space (on a 120 Gb hard disk), chkdsk in the command prompt does the same but if I use a disk space tool such as SpaceSniffer or WinDirStat, only 50Gb of data is found. My guess is that there somehow is a hold on a large block of disk space (but that's just a guess) because of a prior very large (40 Gb) download attempt that didn't complete. There isn't 40Gb of files on the drive (hidden or visible), yet Explorer insists that something is there. How can I claim back this hard disk drive (without formatting my hard disk)? SpaceMonger is providing a clue, reporting four unscannable folders which add up to 43Gb: C:\RRBackups C:\System Volume Information C:\Windows\Csc\v2.06 C:\Windows\System32\LogFiles\Wmi\RtBackup Does anybody know what these folders are for, and how I can claim back at least some space? Restore point claims about 4Gb, so that doesn't seem to be the main problem.

    Read the article

  • Proper use of disk to disk to tape backup using de-duplication and LTO5

    - by Michael
    I currently have ~12TB of data for a full disk to tape (LTO3) backup. Needless to say, it's now requiring over 16 tapes so I'm looking at other solutions. Here is what I've come up with. I'd like to hear the community's thoughts. Server for Disk-to-Disk BackupExec 2010 Using De-duplication Technology 20+TB worth of SATA drives LTO5 robotic library connected via SAS 1Gbps NIC connected to network What I envision is doing a full backup of my entire network which will initially take a long time over the 1Gbps NIC but once the de-duplication kicks in backups should be quick. I will then use the LTO5 to make disk to tape backups and archive those accordingly. What does everyone think? Any faster way of doing the initial full backup over the 1Gbps NIC? What will be my pain points? Is there a better way of doing what I'm trying to achieve?

    Read the article

  • Speed of TrueCrypt whole disk encryption

    - by Gareth
    I'm getting a new development laptop soon, and I'm thinking of using TrueCrypt to encrypt the whole disk. What kind of performance drop can I expect? 10%? 30%? more? Also, assuming the workload has an effect, would compiling/using Visual Studio be affected much? I cannot seem to find anything like this on the web.

    Read the article

  • Dual boot - disk partition issues basic vs dynamic disk

    - by dboyd68
    I have a lenovo X1 that I am looking to dual boot windows and ubuntu on. I am having an issue. The disk came with 4 partitions SYSTEM_DRV, Windows C:, Lenovov Recovery, Hibernate Partition I have a SSD (250 gb) I have shrunk Windows C: so that I have 100gb of unallocated space. My plan was to install ubuntu on that. But when I try to create a new partition to install ubuntu on. Windows is saying I have to convert to a dynamic disk. I don't really understand the difference between Dyanimc and Basic disk but a quick search I am assuming I dont want to do this as I boot from this disk? Any suggestions on what I can do to dual boot? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Connect a 2.5" (laptop hard disk) SATA hard disk to Desktop PC

    - by Lawliet
    Can I connect a laptop SATA hard disk to Desktop PC? Do I have to use some adapters or I can just plug in SATA power connector and SATA data cable like my Desktop hard disk is connected? I noticed that both laptop and desktop SATA disks use same connectors, but I'm afraid that I might fry my laptop hard disk because the SATA connector has both 12V and 5V voltage (given the fact that laptop hard disks has input voltage of 5V) I bought a all-in-one Modex-to-SATA power adapter and SATA cable and I still don't know what to do. I have read various forums and a lot of people are stating that it's perfectly ok, but some are scaring me that by connecting it so, it fried their hard disk. And some also mentioned cutting the yellow 12V wire if I'm planning to use Modex-to-SATA power. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Connect a 2.5" (laptop hard disk) SATA hard disk to Desktop PC

    - by Lawliet
    Can I connect a laptop SATA hard disk to Desktop PC? Do I have to use some adapters or I can just plug in SATA power connector and SATA data cable like my Desktop hard disk is connected? I noticed that both laptop and desktop SATA disks use same connectors, but I'm afraid that I might fry my laptop hard disk because the SATA connector has both 12V and 5V voltage (given the fact that laptop hard disks has input voltage of 5V) I bought a all-in-one Modex-to-SATA power adapter and SATA cable and I still don't know what to do. I have read various forums and a lot of people are stating that it's perfectly ok, but some are scaring me that by connecting it so, it fried their hard disk. And some also mentioned cutting the yellow 12V wire if I'm planning to use Modex-to-SATA power. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Virtualbox - differencing disk based on different differencing disk

    - by Klinki
    I'm trying to create differencing image based on differencing image in VirtualBox 4.2.18. Official documentation says it should be possible: http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch05.html#diffimages Basically I want to achieve this drive hierarchy: + immutable image with Debian and all software installed +---- differencing image with specific configuration, autoreset=off, readonly +-------- differencing image with autoreset=on +---- another differencing image for different virtual machine +-------- differencing image with autoreset=on I successfully created differencing image based on differencing image, but I'm not able to connect it to virtual machine :( It always shows error: Failed to open the hard disk .... cannot register hard disk ... because hard disk with UUID ... already exists Here is screenshot of Virtual Media Manager and error dialog Virtual Media Manager Window screenshot Very strange is that the new differencing image (tempdrive.vdi) doesn't have Actual Size 0. I wasn't able to connect it, but still, it has 36KB of data on it... This is very similar to this older question: How to create a chained differencing disk of another differencing disk in Virtual Box? but suggested solution is not working anymore in VirtualBox 4.2.18, so I posted it as a new question. (Limit for posting links and screenshots is quite annoying..)

    Read the article

  • What is a good encryptable disk image format suitable for rsync on a PC?

    - by Greg Joshner
    I’m looking for a solution to encrypt my XP home directory and then rsync the encrypted image file to a remote server. Since I don’t want to transfer several Gigs for even the smallest change in the image I’m looking for a solution which saves the image “chunked” into smaller files. That way Rsync can transfer only the changed elements. Do you have any ideas? Thanks a lot for your help!

    Read the article

  • How do I make an encrypted disk image on Debian?

    - by Blacklight Shining
    I'm basically looking for an equivalent to OS X's encrypted sparsebundles. The solution should have support for file ACLs and should not force me to specify a size in the beginning (the image should only take up as much space as it needs) or require root access to mount and unmount. Ideally, I should be able to set two different passwords (both for the same data), but that's not too important. (I do have root access to the machine and so can install packages and such, but I would rather not have to sudo just to mount an image.)

    Read the article

  • Update fails to Install

    - by FirmTech
    I get the below error when I try to install updates using Software Updater: Not enough free disk space The upgrade needs a total of 81.3 M free space on disk '/boot'. Please free at least an additional 15.9 M of disk space on '/boot'. Empty your trash and remove temporary packages of former installations using 'sudo apt-get clean'. What should I do? firmtechnologies@FirmTechnologies:~$ (ls -l /boot) total 155801 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1158016 May 3 01:30 abi-3.13.0-24-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1161713 May 8 01:31 abi-3.13.0-26-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1161713 May 15 20:07 abi-3.13.0-27-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1161764 Jun 4 22:57 abi-3.13.0-29-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 165510 May 3 01:30 config-3.13.0-24-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 165538 May 8 01:31 config-3.13.0-26-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 165521 May 15 20:07 config-3.13.0-27-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 165544 Jun 4 22:57 config-3.13.0-29-generic drwxr-xr-x 5 root root 1024 Jun 6 14:31 grub -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 29091568 May 7 21:31 initrd.img-3.13.0-24-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 29094684 May 12 12:24 initrd.img-3.13.0-26-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 29095678 May 18 10:57 initrd.img-3.13.0-27-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 29093700 Jun 6 14:32 initrd.img-3.13.0-29-generic drwx------ 2 root root 12288 Apr 30 17:11 lost+found -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 176500 Mar 12 13:31 memtest86+.bin -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 178176 Mar 12 13:31 memtest86+.elf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 178680 Mar 12 13:31 memtest86+_multiboot.bin -rw------- 1 root root 3372643 May 3 01:30 System.map-3.13.0-24-generic -rw------- 1 root root 3377429 May 8 01:31 System.map-3.13.0-26-generic -rw------- 1 root root 3377429 May 15 20:07 System.map-3.13.0-27-generic -rw------- 1 root root 3378267 Jun 4 22:57 System.map-3.13.0-29-generic -rw------- 1 root root 5776416 May 3 01:30 vmlinuz-3.13.0-24-generic -rw------- 1 root root 5790912 May 8 01:30 vmlinuz-3.13.0-26-generic -rw------- 1 root root 5790912 May 15 20:07 vmlinuz-3.13.0-27-generic -rw------- 1 root root 5792544 Jun 4 22:57 vmlinuz-3.13.0-29-generic

    Read the article

  • How to obtain a S/MIME certificate for e-mail encryption?

    - by mghg
    There are parties, e.g. enterprises, that uses S/MIME certificates for e-mail encryption. To my understanding Thunderbird has support by default for S/MIME. But I have not found a way to obtain a personal S/MIME certificate to be used on a Ubuntu system. Thus my question: How to obtain a S/MIME certificate for e-mail encryption? Moreover, is it correct to believe that Thunderbird has support by default for S/MIME? I am fully aware of PGP, GnuPG and OpenPGP for public-key cryptography and secure e-mail communication. In my opinion, it is very useful that OpenPGP is installed by default on Ubuntu systems. But I need to find a method to communicate securely with parties that use S/MIME and not PGP/GnuPG/OpenPGP.

    Read the article

  • Does GPG allow encryption of multiple files using a wild card like *filename*? [on hold]

    - by user47427
    I am trying to automate the encryption of files on a windows server using a .bat file I created. As long as the filename is hardcoded in the .bat file this works. I want to encrypt numerous files using this .bat file but files are not encrypted when I use wildcards in the filename like filename.txt. I've been trying various version of the following command at the DOS prompt to no avail. All attempts have returned syntax for usage. C:\gpg -v --batch -- yes --always-trust -e -r <encryption-key> *part-of-the-file-name* usage: gpg [options] --encrypt [filename] I received the same usage message with this command: C:\gpg -v --batch -- yes --always-trust -e -r --encrypt part-of-the-file-name I tried without the -v and some of the other options and I still received the same message. I have spent hours today searching the internet for an answer and I can't find one anywhere? Please help.

    Read the article

  • Using our own certificate authority for business email encryption

    - by LumenAlbum
    I've read the available similar questions on serverfault but I haven't quite found a definite answer to the security aspect of it - hence here's my question: I'm administrator of an office working with tax data and we want to start using certificate-based eMail encryption with our clients. Considering the prices for issued certificates by VeriSign & Co I was wondering if we couldn't issue the necessary certificates with a certificate authority of our own. I realize that they do not offer the trust hierarchy that commercial certificates do but I don't see why we would need that. Most of our clients have small businesses and only 20% of them even exchange data with us via email. So if we were to issue certificates for those 20% and our employees, that would enable us to use encrypted emails. Of course they would have to trust our certificate authority and thus once receive our public root certificate. But if we would hand them out to them (or install it) personally, they'd know that it really is our certificate. Is thery a huge security risk that I am missing here? As long as nobody has access to our certificate authority server nobody should be able to interfere with security, right? And the client certificates would be generated and handed out by us, as well... Please advise me if I am making an error in judgement here and thank you in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to Disable Home Folder Encryption After Installing Ubuntu

    - by Chris Hoffman
    Ubuntu offers to encrypt your home directory during installation. The encryption has some drawbacks – there’s a performance penalty and recovering your files is more difficult. If you change your mind later, you can remove the encryption without reinstalling Ubuntu. The process of removing the encryption involves creating a backup copy of your home directory without encryption, deleting the existing home directory, removing the encryption utilities, and moving the unencrypted copy back into place. HTG Explains: What Is RSS and How Can I Benefit From Using It? HTG Explains: Why You Only Have to Wipe a Disk Once to Erase It HTG Explains: Learn How Websites Are Tracking You Online

    Read the article

  • Recover data from Dynamic Disk (MBR) bigger than 2TB

    - by Helder
    Here is the situation: Promise Array FastTrak TX4310 with 3 disks (750 GB each) in RAID5. This comes to around 1500 GB of data. Last week I had the idea of expanding the RAID with an additional 750 GB disk. This would bring the volume to around 2250 GB. I plugged the disk and used the Webpam software to do the RAID expansion. However, I didn't count with the MBR 2TB limit, as I didn't remembered that the disk was using MBR instead of GPT and I didn't check it prior to the expansion. After a couple of days of expansion, today when I got home, the disk in Windows disk manager showed the message "Invalid disk" and when I try to activate it, it says "The operation is not allowed on the Invalid pack". From what I figured, the logical volume on the RAID expanded, and passed that info to the Windows layer and I ended up with an "larger than 2TB" MBR disk. I'm hopping that somehow I can still recover some data from this, and I was wondering if I can "rewrite" the MBR structure back to the 1500 GB partition size, so I can access the partition in Windows. Right now I'm doing an "Analyse" with TestDisk, as I hope the program will pickup the old 1500 structure and allow me to somehow revert back to it. I think that even though the Logical Drive in the RAID is bigger than the 2TB, I can somehow correct the MBR to show the 1500 GB partition again. I had a similar problem once, and I was able to recover the data using a similar method. What do you guys think? Is it a dead end? Am I totally screwed because there is the extra RAID layer that I'm not counting? Or is there other way to move with this? Thanks all!

    Read the article

  • Out of disk space - /boot at 100%

    - by uvasal
    My /boot is at 100%. When I run aptitude search ~ilinux-image I'm getting loads of unused images. When I try to delete one of them (after checking which one is currently in use by doing uname -r), e.g apt-get autoremove linux-image-3.2.0-44-generic I get: Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these: The following packages have unmet dependencies: linux-generic : Depends: linux-headers-generic (= 3.2.0.51.61) but 3.2.0.54.64 is to be installed linux-server : Depends: linux-headers-server (= 3.2.0.51.61) but 3.2.0.54.64 is to be installed E: Unmet dependencies. Try 'apt-get -f install' with no packages (or specify a solution). And running apt-get -f install throws No space left on device. I've also tried doing apt-get purge but I am getting the same thing. Output of df -h and dpkg -l linux-*.: root@hb2088:/srv/www# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda3 9.4G 3.0G 6.0G 34% / udev 301M 4.0K 301M 1% /dev tmpfs 124M 228K 124M 1% /run none 5.0M 0 5.0M 0% /run/lock none 309M 0 309M 0% /run/shm /dev/sda1 92M 91M 0 100% /boot root@hb2088:/srv/www# dpkg -l linux-* Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Description +++-====================================================-====================================================-======================================================================================================================== un linux-doc-3.2.0 <none> (no description available) ii linux-firmware 1.79.6 Firmware for Linux kernel drivers iU linux-generic 3.2.0.51.61 Complete Generic Linux kernel un linux-headers <none> (no description available) un linux-headers-3 <none> (no description available) un linux-headers-3.0 <none> (no description available) ii linux-headers-3.2.0-44 3.2.0-44.69 Header files related to Linux kernel version 3.2.0 ii linux-headers-3.2.0-44-generic 3.2.0-44.69 Linux kernel headers for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP ii linux-headers-3.2.0-45 3.2.0-45.70 Header files related to Linux kernel version 3.2.0 ii linux-headers-3.2.0-45-generic 3.2.0-45.70 Linux kernel headers for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP ii linux-headers-3.2.0-48 3.2.0-48.74 Header files related to Linux kernel version 3.2.0 ii linux-headers-3.2.0-48-generic 3.2.0-48.74 Linux kernel headers for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP ii linux-headers-3.2.0-51 3.2.0-51.77 Header files related to Linux kernel version 3.2.0 ii linux-headers-3.2.0-51-generic 3.2.0-51.77 Linux kernel headers for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP ii linux-headers-3.2.0-52 3.2.0-52.78 Header files related to Linux kernel version 3.2.0 ii linux-headers-3.2.0-52-generic 3.2.0-52.78 Linux kernel headers for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP iU linux-headers-3.2.0-54 3.2.0-54.82 Header files related to Linux kernel version 3.2.0 iU linux-headers-3.2.0-54-generic 3.2.0-54.82 Linux kernel headers for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP iU linux-headers-generic 3.2.0.54.64 Generic Linux kernel headers iU linux-headers-server 3.2.0.54.64 Linux kernel headers on Server Equipment. un linux-image <none> (no description available) un linux-image-3.0 <none> (no description available) ii linux-image-3.2.0-44-generic 3.2.0-44.69 Linux kernel image for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP ii linux-image-3.2.0-45-generic 3.2.0-45.70 Linux kernel image for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP ii linux-image-3.2.0-48-generic 3.2.0-48.74 Linux kernel image for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP iF linux-image-3.2.0-51-generic 3.2.0-51.77 Linux kernel image for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP iF linux-image-3.2.0-52-generic 3.2.0-52.78 Linux kernel image for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP in linux-image-3.2.0-54-generic <none> (no description available) iU linux-image-generic 3.2.0.51.61 Generic Linux kernel image iU linux-image-server 3.2.0.51.61 Linux kernel image on Server Equipment. un linux-initramfs-tool <none> (no description available) un linux-kernel-headers <none> (no description available) un linux-kernel-log-daemon <none> (no description available) ii linux-libc-dev 3.2.0-52.78 Linux Kernel Headers for development un linux-restricted-common <none> (no description available) iU linux-server 3.2.0.51.61 Complete Linux kernel on Server Equipment. un linux-source-3.2.0 <none> (no description available) un linux-tools <none> (no description available) Output of du -sh /boot/*: root@hb2088:~# du -sh /boot/* 781K /boot/abi-3.2.0-44-generic 781K /boot/abi-3.2.0-45-generic 781K /boot/abi-3.2.0-48-generic 781K /boot/abi-3.2.0-51-generic 781K /boot/abi-3.2.0-52-generic 139K /boot/config-3.2.0-44-generic 139K /boot/config-3.2.0-45-generic 139K /boot/config-3.2.0-48-generic 139K /boot/config-3.2.0-51-generic 139K /boot/config-3.2.0-52-generic 1.6M /boot/grub 14M /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-44-generic 14M /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-45-generic 14M /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-48-generic 12K /boot/lost+found 174K /boot/memtest86+.bin 176K /boot/memtest86+_multiboot.bin 2.8M /boot/System.map-3.2.0-44-generic 2.8M /boot/System.map-3.2.0-45-generic 2.8M /boot/System.map-3.2.0-48-generic 2.8M /boot/System.map-3.2.0-51-generic 2.8M /boot/System.map-3.2.0-52-generic 4.8M /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-44-generic 4.8M /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-45-generic 4.8M /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-48-generic 4.8M /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-51-generic 4.8M /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-52-generic

    Read the article

  • Disk errors on tty and syslog/dmesg

    - by Shoaibi
    Recently I have started to get a lot of these errors: Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.554292] ata5: SError: { HostInt 10B8B } Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.559346] sr 4:0:0:0: CDB: Test Unit Ready: 00 00 00 00 00 00 Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.560191] ata5.00: cmd a0/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0 Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.560231] res 51/20:03:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 Emask 0x40 (internal error) Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.575310] ata5.00: status: { DRDY ERR } Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.579801] ata5: hard resetting link Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.929320] ata5: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.941936] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/100 Jun 18 08:57:42 abacus kernel: [ 401.969426] ata5: EH complete Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.527699] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x40 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x80800 action 0x6 Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.527779] ata5.00: irq_stat 0x40000001 Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.527822] ata5: SError: { HostInt 10B8B } Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.527901] sr 4:0:0:0: CDB: Test Unit Ready: 00 00 00 00 00 00 Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.528103] ata5.00: cmd a0/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0 Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.528142] res 51/20:03:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 Emask 0x40 (internal error) Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.528184] ata5.00: status: { DRDY ERR } Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.528303] ata5: hard resetting link Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.875894] ata5: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.888267] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/100 Jun 18 08:57:54 abacus kernel: [ 413.916365] ata5: EH complete Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.537834] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x40 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x80800 action 0x6 Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.545253] ata5.00: irq_stat 0x40000001 Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.549788] ata5: SError: { HostInt 10B8B } Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.554840] sr 4:0:0:0: CDB: Test Unit Ready: 00 00 00 00 00 00 Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.555201] ata5.00: cmd a0/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0 Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.555242] res 51/20:03:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 Emask 0x40 (internal error) Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.570483] ata5.00: status: { DRDY ERR } Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.574695] ata5: hard resetting link Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.924954] ata5: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.936831] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/100 Jun 18 08:57:56 abacus kernel: [ 415.965001] ata5: EH complete Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.529784] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x40 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x80800 action 0x6 Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.529904] ata5.00: irq_stat 0x40000001 Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.530023] ata5: SError: { HostInt 10B8B } Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.530104] sr 4:0:0:0: CDB: Test Unit Ready: 00 00 00 00 00 00 Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.530425] ata5.00: cmd a0/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0 Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.530466] res 51/20:03:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 Emask 0x40 (internal error) Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.530583] ata5.00: status: { DRDY ERR } Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.530705] ata5: hard resetting link Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.873218] ata5: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.885040] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/100 Jun 18 08:58:02 abacus kernel: [ 421.913404] ata5: EH complete Are these critical error messages? What would be the cause and remedy?

    Read the article

  • unable to mount internal disk mount exited with exit code 13

    - by Masri
    My Ubuntu get into error when I try to mount one of my internal disks and it gives this error message: Error mounting: mount exited with exit code 13: $MFTMirr does not match $MFT (record 3). Failed to mount '/dev/sda7': Input/output error NTFS is either inconsistent, or there is a hardware fault, or it's a SoftRAID/FakeRAID hardware. In the first case run chkdsk /f on Windows then reboot into Windows twice. The usage of the /f parameter is very important! If the device is a SoftRAID/FakeRAID then first activate it and mount a different device under the /dev/mapper/ directory, (e.g. /dev/mapper/nvidia_eahaabcc1). Please see the 'dmraid' documentation for more details. pls advise how to solve above error ,Many thanks to you in advance.

    Read the article

  • disk not accessible

    - by user107044
    i formatted my hard drive yesterday and it was working well even after the formatting. But when I restarted my system again , is is showing that the space is alloted to my files but they are inaccessible. I have even tried to unhide the files and folders, if they got hidden somehow. But nothing works. the hard drive is being shown empty but the properties are saying that it still conatins the data : http://imgur.com/ObjTE in the image, it is showing that the directory has only 1 file of size:4.8 kbps but the space being used by the drive is 11.6 GB. do suggest some solution.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >