Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "00067".
Did you mean:
0006
2011 Aug 12
1
sapply to bind columns, with repeat?
...00042 B0607 00043 20607 00041 B0707 00055
20707 00043 B0807 00039 20807 00055 B0907 00037 20907 00039 B1007
00038 21007 00037 B1107 00048 21107 00038 B1207 00050 21207 00048
B1307 00051 21307 00050 B1407 00058 21407 00051 B1507 00068 21507
00058 B1607 00065 21607 00068 B1707 00068 21707 00065 B1807 00067
21807 00068 B1907 00068 21907 00067 B2007 00069 22007 00068 B2107
00057 22107 00069 B2207 00048 22207 00057 B2307 00051 22307 00048
B2407 00073 22407 00051 B2507 00062 22507 00073 B2607 00056 22607
00062 B2707 00053 22707 00056 B2807 00064 22807 00053 B2907 00057
22907 00064 B3007 00047 23007 00057...
2019 Nov 29
0
Continuing the split (was: Let's split up the libguestfs git repo and tarballs)
...ing suggestions welcome).
I'm not especially wedded to a particular approach, but I would like
to get something going on this sooner rather than later.
Rich.
PS.
If you want to follow the rest of this lengthy thread then:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2018-February/thread.html#00067
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-April/thread.html#00260
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-June/thread.html#00095
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
vi...
2019 Jun 08
4
[PATCH libnbd v3] lib: Atomically update h->state when leaving the locked region.
v1 was here:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-June/thread.html#00055
v2 was here:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-June/thread.html#00067
v3:
- Fix atomicly -> atomically in commit message.
- Fix a comment.
- Fix TOCTTOU: There is now an inline function generated called
<name>_is_permitted_state, and this is called twice, first outside
the lock for the quick rejection check, and again inside the lock
in case...
2011 May 17
1
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] x86_64-pc-win32 ABI var arg code gen bug? Is the bitcode correct? Or is it the code gen?
... mov rcx, QWORD PTR Marker$[rsp]
> 00055 e8 00 00 00 00 call ReturnMarker
> 0005a 89 44 24 20 mov DWORD PTR Value$[rsp], eax
> ; 84 : VA_END(Marker);
> 0005e 48 c7 44 24 28
> 00 00 00 00 mov QWORD PTR Marker$[rsp], 0
> ; 85 :
> ; 86 : return Value;
> 00067 8b 44 24 20 mov eax, DWORD PTR Value$[rsp]
> ; 87 : }
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
2019 Jul 02
3
Re: 1.39 proposal: Let's split up the libguestfs git repo and tarballs
On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 09:32:26AM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote:
> On Monday, 1 July 2019 22:47:32 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > > Does this mean we need to move immediately to a submodule if just
> > > > splitting virt-p2v, or copy code as you suggest? Maybe not, because
> > > > you can imagine for just this project copying the code needed from the
>
2019 Oct 15
4
Splitting the large libguestfs repo
...re complex
technique described here which I didn't try yet:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2797191/how-to-split-a-git-repository-while-preserving-subdirectories
Previous discussion was in this thread over several months:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2018-February/thread.html#00067
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-April/thread.html#00260
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-June/thread.html#00095
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-July/thread.html#00000
Rich.