search for: superate

We have a disk array behind two external SATA port multipliers (four disks on each multiplier) which has been running btrfs (RAID 1 for both data and metadata). Unfortunately, earlier today it seems one of the SATA cables came loose, resulting in the kernel (2.6.37) eventually OOPSing although apparently not before writing quite a bit of data. Upon reboot, I was met with the dreaded,

libswfdec/swfdec_as_context.c | 7 +- libswfdec/swfdec_as_interpret.c | 35 ++++++----- libswfdec/swfdec_as_object.c | 12 +++ libswfdec/swfdec_as_object.h | 5 - libswfdec/swfdec_as_super.c | 46 +++++++++++++- libswfdec/swfdec_as_super.h | 2 libswfdec/swfdec_as_with.c | 2

libswfdec/swfdec_as_frame.c | 3 - libswfdec/swfdec_as_function.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++-------- libswfdec/swfdec_as_internal.h | 16 ++++- libswfdec/swfdec_as_interpret.c | 60 +++++++++++----------- libswfdec/swfdec_as_object.c | 10 ++- libswfdec/swfdec_as_super.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------- libswfdec/swfdec_as_super.h | 10 ++- 7 files

discount cheap wholesale We are supplier in china,sell Jordan shoes, ( paypal accept ) ( www.super-saler.com ) discount cheap wholesale air max shoes,shox ( paypal accept ) ( www.super-saler.com ) discount cheap wholesale trainers, dunk shoes,air force ( paypal accept ) ( www.super-saler.com ) one,etc..our company supply are as follows: discount cheap wholesale AIR Jordans shoes (

Greetings, I had a question about the $super argument that I wasn''t able to find in documentation, searching etc. What exactly is the $super argument. Is it a reference to the super class''s prototype function? Or is it an instantiated object of the super class that is passed to the subclass''s method? I am completely confuzzled on this one, my typical

libswfdec/swfdec_as_interpret.c | 3 test/trace/Makefile.am | 18 ++++ test/trace/callmethod-this-5.swf |binary test/trace/callmethod-this-5.swf.trace | 136 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ test/trace/callmethod-this-6.swf |binary test/trace/callmethod-this-6.swf.trace | 134 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ test/trace/callmethod-this-7.swf

Signed-off-by: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com> --- fs/btrfs/super.c | 10 ++++++++-- 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b/fs/btrfs/super.c index 15634d4..16f31e1 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/super.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c @@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ static int btrfs_parse_early_options(const char *options, fmode_t flags, u64 *subvol_rootid, struct

Hi all. I long time discover strange to me behavior. If I add --fake-super option on both sides rsync start always set owner and group of symlink. What interesting there no error, but it done each time as it has been changed. Simple reproduce: $ mkdir rsync.symlinks $ echo 'file content' > rsync.symlinks/file.itself $ ln -s file.itself rsync.symlinks/file.symlink Then try to transfer

Hi Is stubbing a call to super possible? I am testing a protected method called authorized in a Rails controller ... part of the logic flow calls super which calls the method authorized in the application controller. As I am focused on the logic of the method in the controller I am testing I just wish to stub the value returned in the super. Is this at all possible? Cheers Shane

Hi Quentin, Let me clarify if I understood this correctly. If the accesses (writes and reads) to sub-registers are expressed always as sub-registers of the super-register register class (e.g., SuperReg.sub1;), then the spilling decision is for the super register. But, if the accesses are in terms of the register class of the sub-registers directly (SubReg;), then the spilling decision will

I'm not sure where else to ask about this, so please excuse me if this is the wrong forum. In trying to remove a 'nodump' flag on a directory with the 'chflags' command I have noticed that the 'nonodump' flag does not function. I see an open PR for the problem: o [2003/01/09] i386/46912 johan chflags nonodump fails I was wondering when this might be dealt with? Else is

Hi there, How does one spec an invocation of a Ruby keyword, such as super in this case? class User < ActiveResource::Base # faking the ActiveRecord before/after_save observers def save super UserMailer.deliver_activation(self) if recently_activated? end end Does the solution look anything like the following? describe User do describe ''#save'' do it

Right Matthias, I am aware that an implementation for storeRegToStackSlot()/loadRegFromStackSlot() is necessary. But these functions receive the physical register that need to be spilled, they might receive the sub-register. In this case, using the super-register naively is unsafe (e.g., one might overwrite parts of it). Thus, I think the register allocator/spillar need to be aware of the

The register coalescer treats virtual super register classes -- a sequential register range composed of multiple hardware registers -- as a register with sub registers. When making coalescing decisions it thinks that the virtual super reg interferes with sub reg instances, even though in reality they shouldn't conflict. That is, they are individual registers and would be better compared as

When using fake-super mode in an rsync receiver, anything that's neither a file nor a directory (e.g. devices, symlinks, etc) is converted into a file, and properties such as original ownership, filetype, and permissions are stored in a specific extended attribute. In the case of a symlink, the contents of the link are stored in a plain file. The original mode of the symlink is normally

Hello, As i cannot get 3.0.0pre5 to work in my environment (throwing crazy errors which i've posted previously), i would like to revert to 2.6.9 . Of course, the reason i tried to use v3 in the first place was for the acl, xattr, and fake-super options - which, evidently, can be enabled under 2.6.9, as per the following sources: http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2007-February/017218.html

To make my point clear, I believe an implementation of storeRegToStackSlot()/loadRegFromStackSlot() is not sufficient (as it received the physical register already). Does this make sense? On 2018-01-30 13:33, ahmede wrote: > Right Matthias, I am aware that an implementation for > storeRegToStackSlot()/loadRegFromStackSlot() is necessary. But these > functions receive the physical

On 03/02/18 13:20, Dave Gordon via rsync wrote: > When using fake-super mode in an rsync receiver, anything that's neither a > file nor a directory (e.g. devices, symlinks, etc) is converted into a file, > and properties such as original ownership, filetype, and permissions are > stored in a specific extended attribute. > > In the case of a symlink, the contents of the link

Thread split from my previous communication. Here is the key-commands logs on the platform. ***************** failed-regress.log ************ trace: AuthorizedKeysCommand with arguments FAIL: connect failed trace: AuthorizedKeysCommand without arguments FAIL: connect failed ***************** failed-ssh.log ************ trace: AuthorizedKeysCommand with arguments

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7108 Summary: --fake-super should be nestable Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: matt at mattmccutchen.net