search for: worries

Red Hat AS 3 Samba 3.0.0 (from distro) openldap-2.0.27-11 smbldap-tools-0.8.2-1 nss_ldap-207-5 PDC and LDAP Master / BDC and LDAP slave errors in client logs - should I worry? something I can fix? client log A - Worry? Don't Worry? [2004/01/29 08:08:59, 0] groupdb/mapping.c:init_group_mapping(139) Failed to open group mapping database [2004/01/29 08:08:59, 0]

On Mar 16, 2005, at 12:01, Chris Lattner wrote: > It's not clear to me if pthreads will be required just by the > JIT-using-tools, or if it will be required by everything. If you have > thread-support stuff going into lib/Support, all llvm tools should be > linked to libpthread. Well, at the moment, I've added a mutex to ExecutionEngine. Thus, anything that pulls in this

Hi all, Will keep this brief :-) Just trying to clear some things up regarding winbind. wbinfo -u returns "Error looking up domain users". I'm only using winbind for ntlm_auth which works fine. I'm not using AD or any Windows server-based domain. Samba only. There don't seem to be any obvious errors in the winbind log. Do I need to worry about that error? Should it

Hi all, Currently in the llvm middle-end, we disable some optimizations because we worry about the register pressure, (e.g. GVNHoist and ArgumentPromotion). However, in the architecture that are register-rich, e.g. FPGAs, we do not need to worry about the register pressure at all. For these architecures, we may want to optimization the LLVM IR without worrying about the register pressure. I

Hi all, I checked out everything mentioned in GettingStarted at tags/RELEASE_370/final and ran `make -j4 check-all`. I got three test failures: libc++abi :: catch_array_01.pass.cpp libc++abi :: catch_function_01.pass.cpp libc++abi :: catch_member_function_pointer_01.pass.cpp Should I worry? Here are the failures as reported, with the LLVM source directory replaced with ... for

...tFlash disk for my data-logging application (power can disapear anytime). The quantity & frequency of the data logged itself is not a problem at all considering flash wear. But I'm a bit worried about the kernel/ext3 doing regular writes by itself even when there are no userspace writes. (worries are partially caused by memories from long time ago about idle laptop doing regular writes on disk). Anybody out there who knows how this works ? Can I use an ext3 fs without having regular "automatic" writes to the device it is located on ? (and thus not destroy my CompactFlash device...

I see the comment here about some 64bit combinations failing. Well, my configuration fails. Is this really something to worry about? for R-patched: fi1->cat SVN-REVISION Revision: 39576 Last Changed Date: 2006-10-03 fi1-> > ## failed for some 64bit-Lapack-gcc combinations: > sm <- cbind(1, 3:1, 1:3) > eigenok(sm, eigen(sm)) Error: abs(A %*% V - V %*% diag(lam)) < Eps is

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> wrote: >> But assuming I'm right, what I'm proposing is that instead of passing >> the input in as a global buffer, to instead pass it in as a const >> buffer. As such instead of sticking it into ->set_global_binding, >> you'd stick it into ->set_constant_buffer, and then

Hi all, I have just received the following e-mail from an Asterisk user: "I just made a call via BT to a mobile. Then an incoming call came in and Ann else answered it - it made my call go completely fuzzy and I could hear what the woman on the other line was saying to Ann but I couldn't hear my conversation! When Ann's call finished - mine went even fuzzier and all I could hear

...ot some >> specific buffer. Trying to load address 0 from it will likely lead to >> sadness, unless you happen to have something mapped there. BUFFER has >> an implied base address, based on the binding point, but MEMORY has no >> such thing. OK, that answers my questions / worries, I was worried that MEMORY too would have an implied base address, which would more or less only get in the way with opencl, but if the memory register file takes a virtual memory address as second operand to LOAD then I'm happy. So I guess that if we mix in say TGSI-shared / OpenCL-local memo...

OEL 5, OCFS 1.4, using EMC Power Path for multi pathing. I want t mount the OCFS2 file system on the emc power path device. I can mount by UUID, and not have to worry about persistent bindings across nodes. But how do I make sure when it mounts by UUID , that the pwoer path device is used. Any help will be much appreciated. Thanks -- Sridhar Avantsa savantsa at gmail.com -------------- next

...have absconded with the cash and left all the hard working devs high and dry..well that is scary. They all worked so hard and who knows what will happen now. If centos falls I have no choice but to go to redhat. I am wondering if the conversion will be easy or a complete reinstall. I ponder the worries I think we are all faced with here. I think all of us would follow a fork... Whatever they end up calling it. But I am worried about the immediate future for the project. None of those guys deserve what is happening to them and all of us are affected. If anyone lives near Lance, perhaps a good ca...

...d I'm very grateful that the infrastructure for it has been provided, but I worry about these terms. Would anyone linked to the wiki care to comment on the reason for them? A creative commons license would still allow you to publish a book based on the submissions, if that is the intent. What worries me most is that the current terms seem crafted so as to ensure that should the people who run voip-info ever decide to remove content, or stop hosting the wiki, it couldn't be mirrored anywhere else. regards, Julien

Hi, I have a question: do I have to worry if I run with wine an executable that may contain a virus (I am running linux as a normal user, not root)? -- Peter Kostov, webdesigner, photographer Sofia, Bulgaria Home sites - www.webdesign.light-bg.com - www.light-bg.com

Hi, I'm new in LLVM project , I have to write a compiler frond-end (based on LLVM) in C++ to support my programming language .Am I have to implement support for each architecture or LLVM has libraries that can do this for me ? (btw I don't want to support architecture that LLVM don't) . does LLVM has helper functions to create objects in heap ? if not is it good idea to use C++11

I have an application where I am allowing users to upload (or refer the app. to) arbritrary HTML that I am (currently) displaying in an IFRAME on a page. The users will be authenticated so it''s not open to the entire universe. I was always uneasy with this, but after reading the security chapter of AWDWR, I am even more concerned. What kinds of applications do people have out there

Hi, I''m running Xen 4.2.0 with Linux kernel 3.7.0 and I''m seeing a flood of these messages in xen dmesg: (XEN) traps.c:3156: GPF (0060): ffff82c480159247 -> ffff82c4802170e4 (XEN) traps.c:3156: GPF (0060): ffff82c480159247 -> ffff82c4802170e4 (XEN) traps.c:3156: GPF (0060): ffff82c480159247 -> ffff82c4802170e4 (XEN) traps.c:3156: GPF (0060): ffff82c480159247 ->

Patches item #4603, was opened at 2006-05-29 16:07 You can respond by visiting: http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=413&aid=4603&group_id=85 Category: win32-open3 Group: Bug Fix Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 3 Submitted By: John-Mason Shackelford (jpshackelford) Assigned to: Nobody (None) Summary: [open3] set $? and return Process::Status with block call Initial

The virtual machine I'm implementing allocates objects on the heap using Boehm's garbage collector. I currently have an interpreter working for my language, and I'm working on a JIT that will compile some of the functions that would otherwise get interpreted. What I'm wondering is whether or not I need to perform special adjustments for the GC to work properly. My understanding is