search for: belone

On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 04:28:13PM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote: > > It doesn't work for me at first since in my llvm there's only > llvm.bpf.load.*. > > I think llvm.bpf.store.* belone to some patches you haven't posted yet? nope. only loads have special instructions ld_abs/ld_ind which are represented by these intrinsics. stores, so far, are done via single bpf_store_bytes() helper function. > >the typeid changing ids with order is surprising. > >I think the as...

Hello, I am a very new user to R so please have patience with me. :clap: I am trying to evalute the "internal response" for a couple of different cluster methods with the help of the AdjustedRandIndex, which is included in the mclust package. However, I do get a bit puzzled when I get a negative value as the value should be in intervall of [0,1], am I correct? Have I done something

On 8/4/15 11:51 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote: > void bpf_store_half(void *skb, int off, int val) > asm("llvm.bpf.store.half"); > int func() > { > bpf_store_half(0, 0, 0); > return 0; > } > > Compiled with: > > $ clang -g -target bpf -O2 -S -c test.c > > And get this: > > .text > .globl func > .align

Hi all, I've an asterisk ver 1.4.22. As in object I have an extension beloning to a queue. I need that for an external incoming call, the extension recieve the call waiting signal/tone, whereas for internal incoming call, the extension appear busy. Is it possible? Could someone let me know the right way to do that? thanks a lot in advance lorenzo -- "Chi vive sperando muore cagando ...

Short version: Do I need to re-run script/generate after doing ''rails .'' ?? My rails app worked fine under ruby 1.8.2 and rails 0.13. I then upgraded to rails 1.0 and it still worked fine. Don''t ask me exactly what I did when I upgraded rails then, I don''t remember, exactly. Yesterday committed the rails app to svn then I upgraded to ruby 1.8.4 and

Gregory Haskins wrote: > On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 19:27 +0200, Farkas Levente wrote: > >> ok but now as qemu code was imported into kvm, then it's probably would >> be better to witch gcc-4.x? > > Sure. Are you volunteering? ;) I'm sure both upstream QEMU developers, > KVM developers, and the community using either would be most > appreciative. I know I

Greetings, Attached patch "fixes" the following warning while compiling with gcc 3.4.5, openssh 4.3p2 in an AMD64 Linux system, which is triggered by the comparison between off_t (signed long) and size_t (unsigned long) as shown : scp.c: In function `source': scp.c:632: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned scp.c:639: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned I am