search for: 13353

Logged this: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13353 I might respectfully suggest that building ITK (like building Boost) is an excellent torture test for CLANG. Up until last week the SVN head worked fine, now it doesn't. Later today I'll try building ITK again with CLang SVN head and see if someone fixed this...

...o 1.7GHz when I want to concentrate – then the whine is gone (but the simulation is slower). Does anyone have any idea – or hints regarding what else I could think about ? Regards, Ulrike ****************************** Prof. Dr. Ulrike Grömping Fachbereich II TFH Berlin Luxemburger Str. 10 13353 Berlin mail: groemping@tfh-berlin.de www: www.tfh-berlin.de/~groemp/ ****************************** ------- End of Forwarded Message ------- ****************************** Prof. Dr. Ulrike Grömping Fachbereich II TFH Berlin Luxemburger Str. 10 13353 Berlin mail: groemping@tfh-berlin.de...

Hi all, What is the current preferred method for backing up ZFS data pools, preferably using free ($0.00) software, and assuming that access to individual files (a la ufsbackup/ufsrestore) is required? TIA, -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member CEO, My Online Home Inventory URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer

Copying a CD with k3b is no problem, except I want to include on my copy the cbbd data (from freedb.org). I've configured k3b's cddb section according to instructions at <http://www.freedb.org/en/faq.3.html#15> and read every article google could find about "k3b cddb freedb.org config", but still k3b can't manage it. Grip handles getting the cddb data just fine.

Hi Kent, maybe it could be added to LLVM's nightly testsuite? Ciao, Duncan. On 17/07/12 17:57, Kent Williams wrote: > Logged this: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13353 > > I might respectfully suggest that building ITK (like building Boost) > is an excellent torture test for CLANG. Up until last week the SVN > head worked fine, now it doesn't. Later today I'll try building ITK > again with CLang SVN head and see if someone fixed this... &...

...ing to recreate the binary, everything is legal unless you make unlawful changes to the original source. So calm down, read the GPL and the CDDL by your own - repeat this - until you fully understand both licenses. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

...clude/tk8.3/tk.h> configure:13348: checking for /usr/include/tk.h configure:13358: gcc -E -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/include /tcl8.3 conftest.c >/dev/null 2>conftest.out configure:13354: /usr/include/tk.h: No such file or directory configure: failed program was: #line 13353 "configure" #include "confdefs.h" #include </usr/include/tk.h> configure:13385: checking for tk.h configure:13389: tk.h: No such file or directory In fact, tk.h is in /usr/include/tcl8.3/ , despite the failed program compilation report. R 1.5.0 and above work fine. Can...

Why does ZFS report such small directory sizes? For example, take a maildir directory with ten entries: total 2385 drwx------ 8 17121 vmail 10 Jun 8 23:50 . drwx--x--x 14 root root 14 May 12 2006 .. drwx------ 5 17121 vmail 5 May 25 18:16 .Trash drwx------ 5 17121 staff 6 Jun 9 00:01 .testing -rw------- 1 17121 staff 0 Jun

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:32:45AM -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: > Wasn't Solaris, which for awhile at least, was probably the most popular > Unix, using ksh by default? Solaris /bin/sh was a real real dumb version of the bourne shell. Solaris included /bin/ksh as part of the core distribution (ksh88 was a part of the SVr4 specification) and so many scripts were written with #!/bin/ksh at

...as usable and probably as ubiquitous as > perl. And you have not mentioned anything about how that might hurt > you. I explained this to you in vast details. If you ignore this explanation, I cannot help you. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

...bit clean. - job-control. If you do not call "jsh", or if you switch off jobcontrol via "set +m" in a job shell, you have the job-control related builtins but there is no processgroup management. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

...-clause BSD license is not a valid OSS license and all original BSD code was converted by addict of the president of UC-Berleley. So you claim that there is 4-clause BSD code in the Linux kernel? You are kidding :-( J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

...d require (when following the GPL) to relicense the BSD code under GPL in order to make the whole be under GPL. In other words, if you can legally combine BSD code with GPL code, you can do with GPL and CDDL as well. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

When I use copy/paste text into a window running vi, if there is a single line starting with '#', in the pasted content, it adds a # to all subsequent lines and indents each an additional level. Is there some way to eliminate this bizarre behavior, preferably globally and permanently so I don't have to repeat some change for every machine/user where I might log in? -- Les

...ven the fact that Sven Maschek wrote down a lot, it seems the information is still here. I would be interested to understand why Heirloom seems to so well known and my portability attempts seem to be widely unknown. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

...awyers that checked my code ;-) My code was audited by "Sun legal", "Oracle legal" and by the legal department from SuSe. Question: when will RedHat follow the legal audits from these companies? J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

Here''s some exciting news! Chris Emura, the Filesystem Development Manager within Apple''s CoreOS organization is interested in porting ZFS to OS X. For more information, please e-mail him directly at cemura at apple.com. Speaking for the zfs team (at Sun), this is great news and we fully support the effort. my powerbook hungers for ZFS, eric This message posted from

...GPL only patch. If you continue to claim not to have an answer from me, I need to assume that you are not interested in a serious discussion. Conclusion: dual licensing is not helpful and it even has disadvantages. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:38:25AM -0400, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Fascinating. As I'd been in Sun OS, and started doing admin work when it > became Solaris, I'd missed that bit. A question: did the license agreement > include payment, or was it just restrictive on distribution? In 1990, when I started using ksh88, it was totally commercial. Binaries were $$$ and source was

I have a question that has been puzzling me for some time ... what is the reason RedHat chose to go with btrfs rather than working with the ZFS-on-Linux folks (now OpenZFS)? Is it a licensing issue, political, etc? Although btrfs is making progress, ZFS is far more mature, has a few more stable features (especially Raid-z3) and has worked flawlessly for me on CentOS-6 and Scientific Linux-6.