search for: 20468

...OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: critical Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau AssignedTo: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org ReportedBy: wouter at grep.be QAContact: xorg-team at lists.x.org Created an attachment (id=20468) --> (http://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=20468) Xorg log with 'Option "ModeDebug" "on"' in xorg.conf I did a 'git pull' of both last night; but after recompilation, nouveau no longer works, with the following error message: (EE) NOUVEAU(0): Point...

Hi guys, A while ago, I submitted this test http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=20468 stating the ongame poker client worked almost flawlessly with wine. I stopped playing for a while, and redownloaded it today from https://www.unibet.fr/sps/poker/telecharger I can't get it to run anymore. I've winetricked vcrun2008 and wininet. Installation still works fine. Then I get a l...

...h user: jelo and pass: 1234 I can see the resource but I get an error telling me that the ACCESS IS DENIED to W: and this is the log: [2011/02/16 16:22:16, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection_snum(1077) 2000-96 (10.11.4.22) connect to service share initially as user jelo (uid=500, gid=500) (pid 20468) What can I do ??? I have this problem from a lot of days ago :( Thanks in advance !!! JeLo

...Climate & Air Pollution >> >> Federal Department of Economic Affairs, >> Education and Research EAER >> Agroscope >> Research Division, Agroecology and Environment >> >> Reckenholzstrasse 191, CH-8046 Z?rich >> Phone +41 58 468 75 11 <+41%2058%20468%2075%2011> >> Fax +41 58 468 72 01 <+41%2058%20468%2072%2001> >> raphael.felber at agroscope.admin.ch<mailto:raphael.felber@ >> agroscope.admin.ch> >> www.agroscope.ch<http://www.agroscope.ch/> >> >> >> [[alternative HTML ve...

The large value for maximum time may be due to garbage collection, which happens periodically. E.g., try the following, where the unlist(as.list()) creates a lot of garbage. I get a very large time every 102 or 51 iterations and a moderately large time more often mb <- microbenchmark::microbenchmark({ x <- as.list(sin(1:5e5)); x <- unlist(x) / cos(1:5e5) ; sum(x) }, times=1000)

...15050 15436 15476 15949 15959 15964 15965 15971 16106 16110 16283 16284 16293 16310 16318 16331 16372 16373 16374 16785 16786 16787 16985 16987 17050 17855 17857 17871 17875 17876 17877 17959 17978 17979 18044 18807 18814 18821 18822 18823 18917 18918 18936 19005 19121 19291 19292 20058 20372 20467 20468 20469 20475 20489 20510 20516 20521 20522 20523 20524 20541 20560 20562 20582 20584 20653 20654 20904 21532 21595 21596 21716 21717 21719 21724 21725 * 7 RECENT b OK Search completed (4.468 secs). -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type...

...358 19360 19361 19362 > 19363 19375 19388 19390 19391 19393 19394 19421 19422 19423 19437 19492 > 19579 19594 19660 19668 19918 19920 19921 20016 20032 20034 20036 20038 > 20041 20053 20055 20149 20150 20159 20210 20211 20258 20282 20301 20355 > 20356 20357 20358 20360 20371 20376 20467 20468 20469 20475 20477 20481 > 20482 20483 20485 20487 20488 20489 20490 20491 20492 20493 20498 20504 > 20510 20533 20534 20535 20536 20537 20538 20541 20543 20546 20576 20580 > 20583 20585 20626 20634 20655 20724 20725 20726 20727 20728 20729 20730 > 20731 20732 20733 20962 20967 20968 209...

Dear all I was thinking about efficient reading data into R and tried several ways to test if load(file.Rdata) or readRDS(file.rds) is faster. The files file.Rdata and file.rds contain the same data, the first created with save(d, ' file.Rdata', compress=F) and the second with saveRDS(d, ' file.rds', compress=F). First I used the function microbenchmark() and was a astonished

Hi, I am trying to get faster search results on our webmail client(Roundcube). Besides using Lucene for FTS are there other options? Would having all mails indexed give fast results? Currently the time it takes to search 25,000mails is 4mins. If indexed how much faster are we looking at? Really appreciate if someone could advise about this. Thanks Kevin

...19257 19259 19276 19358 19360 19361 19362 19363 19375 19388 19390 19391 19393 19394 19421 19422 19423 19437 19492 19579 19594 19660 19668 19918 19920 19921 20016 20032 20034 20036 20038 20041 20053 20055 20149 20150 20159 20210 20211 20258 20282 20301 20355 20356 20357 20358 20360 20371 20376 20467 20468 20469 20475 20477 20481 20482 20483 20485 20487 20488 20489 20490 20491 20492 20493 20498 20504 20510 20533 20534 20535 20536 20537 20538 20541 20543 20546 20576 20580 20583 20585 20626 20634 20655 20724 20725 20726 20727 20728 20729 20730 20731 20732 20733 20962 20967 20968 20970 20974 21007 21008...

Not really, doing the way below you don't even have to worry about it. They both go out at the same instant and as soon as it hits voicemail it disconnects the other leg. If you wanted you could leave it ringing for twenty minutes and it would still have the same effect. Kind regards, Matt > On Feb 6, 2017, at 12:29 PM, Tech Support <asterisk at voipbusiness.us> wrote: >

...949 15959 15964 15965 > 15971 16106 16110 16283 16284 16293 16310 16318 16331 16372 16373 16374 > 16785 16786 16787 16985 16987 17050 17855 17857 17871 17875 17876 17877 > 17959 17978 17979 18044 18807 18814 18821 18822 18823 18917 18918 18936 > 19005 19121 19291 19292 20058 20372 20467 20468 20469 20475 20489 20510 > 20516 20521 20522 20523 20524 20541 20560 20562 20582 20584 20653 20654 > 20904 21532 21595 21596 21716 21717 21719 21724 21725 > * 7 RECENT > b OK Search completed (4.468 secs). >