search for: destoy

Hi Jeff and others, When building the llvm runtime, I always get this error message: 'Can't destroy file: The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process.' The file is destoyed anyway. I think that the the real error is the path for the file (*/\file.tmp). However, I can't find the bug in the source. Do you have any clue?: ----------------------------- llvm[3]: Building Debug Bytecode Archive libcrtend.bca /bin/rm -f /C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-4-1/Debug/lib/lib...

Hi all I have a CentOS 5.1 x64 server, running Xen version 3.1.0-53.1.21.el5 & Windows 2003 VM. After doing a software update in Windows (via Remote Desktop), I rebooted windows, but it never came back up. So, I logged into the server via SSH, and destoyed the VM, and recrated it. Yet it doesn''t boot up ( I can''t connect to it via RDP). So, how do I debug it to see why it didn''t bootup? -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Office: 087 805-9573 Fax No: 086 609 6128 Cell: 082 554 7532 Web: http://www.SoftDux....

...pts? Reid. On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 11:37, Henrik Bach wrote: > Hi Jeff and others, > > When building the llvm runtime, I always get this error message: 'Can't > destroy file: The process cannot access the file because it is being used by > another process.' The file is destoyed anyway. > > I think that the the real error is the path for the file (*/\file.tmp). > However, I can't find the bug in the source. Do you have any clue?: > > ----------------------------- > llvm[3]: Building Debug Bytecode Archive libcrtend.bca > /bin/rm -f /C/projects...

...1-26 at 11:37, Henrik Bach wrote: > > Hi Jeff and others, > > > > When building the llvm runtime, I always get this error message: 'Can't > > destroy file: The process cannot access the file because it is being >used by > > another process.' The file is destoyed anyway. > > > > I think that the the real error is the path for the file (*/\file.tmp). > > However, I can't find the bug in the source. Do you have any clue?: > > > > ----------------------------- > > llvm[3]: Building Debug Bytecode Archive libcrtend.bca...

Hi Community, I''m currently trying to create a blog software in rails, but I''ve got a problem: I generated scaffolding for my articles and only want administrators to write, edit or delete articles. So I wanted to move this parts to another, secured controller. The one controller to display articles is called articles :), the other is also called articles, but is located in a

Hi Folks, Does anyone know if (apparently not on CRAN) there is any archive of older versions of R packages? Or is it the case that not only are old versions on CRAN humanesly destoyed, but all older versions out in the wild are hunted down and shot? (I can find older versions of the R "core", but not of other packages). With thanks, Ted. -------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <Ted.Harding at manchester.ac.uk&g...

...d others, > > > > > > > > When building the llvm runtime, I always get this error message: >'Can't > > > > destroy file: The process cannot access the file because it is being > > >used by > > > > another process.' The file is destoyed anyway. > > > > > > > > I think that the the real error is the path for the file >(*/\file.tmp). > > > > However, I can't find the bug in the source. Do you have any clue?: > > > > > > > > ----------------------------- > >...

...npinned before destroying them). This way those CPU strutures could not be destroyed. There is workaround which gives a chance to stop all unneeded processors in state where relevant structures are owned by new kernel and there is no need to destroy them. That way all old kernel structures could be destoyed and new kernel could be started. However, this leads to the situation in which new system must run only one CPU (others are stopped in special way). Now I think that it could be fixed but it requires some work on code stopping all unneeded CPUs (the final and correct solution should add special h...

...npinned before destroying them). This way those CPU strutures could not be destroyed. There is workaround which gives a chance to stop all unneeded processors in state where relevant structures are owned by new kernel and there is no need to destroy them. That way all old kernel structures could be destoyed and new kernel could be started. However, this leads to the situation in which new system must run only one CPU (others are stopped in special way). Now I think that it could be fixed but it requires some work on code stopping all unneeded CPUs (the final and correct solution should add special h...

...npinned before destroying them). This way those CPU strutures could not be destroyed. There is workaround which gives a chance to stop all unneeded processors in state where relevant structures are owned by new kernel and there is no need to destroy them. That way all old kernel structures could be destoyed and new kernel could be started. However, this leads to the situation in which new system must run only one CPU (others are stopped in special way). Now I think that it could be fixed but it requires some work on code stopping all unneeded CPUs (the final and correct solution should add special h...

Hello, how can I check if a destroy was successful? Is the object only frozen if deleted or do I have to do an additional find to see if there is a record left? What happens if an after_destroy callback returns false? Is there always a rollback? Markus

The following 6 patches cleanup the jbd code and kill about 200 lines. First of 4 patches can apply to 2.6.13-git8 and 2.6.13-mm2. The rest of them can apply to 2.6.13-mm2. fs/jbd/checkpoint.c | 179 +++++++++++-------------------------------- fs/jbd/commit.c | 101 ++++++++++-------------- fs/jbd/journal.c | 11 +- fs/jbd/revoke.c | 158