search for: differenciate

...row 4 and 11 are multiplied by 3 and 0.5 So it would be 20 + 23 * 3 + 24 + 25 + 30 * 0.5. And I have this format in different files so I can't do all by hand. Can anybody help me with a script that can differentiate this? Thanks -- View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Differenciate-numbers-from-reference-for-rows-tp3019853p3019853.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

...ause we need to be compatible with older qemus, we essentially need a quirk that will make all virtio devices assume that property is present. That will of course break whenever we try to use another implementation of virtio on powerpc which doesn't bypass the iommu. We don't have a way to differenciate a virtio device that does the bypass from one that doesn't and the backward compatibility requirement forces us to treat all existing virtio devices as doing bypass. The only way out of this while keeping the "platform" stuff would be to also bump some kind of version in the virtio c...

...ause we need to be compatible with older qemus, we essentially need a quirk that will make all virtio devices assume that property is present. That will of course break whenever we try to use another implementation of virtio on powerpc which doesn't bypass the iommu. We don't have a way to differenciate a virtio device that does the bypass from one that doesn't and the backward compatibility requirement forces us to treat all existing virtio devices as doing bypass. The only way out of this while keeping the "platform" stuff would be to also bump some kind of version in the virtio c...

...4.23. I have a provider giving me two PRI (different rate centers) through SIP. Both PRI comes in from the same IP on the provider side, but go to two different IPs (both on the same box) on my side. How can I setup two different SIP peer, one for each of the PRIs I get, if all I can use to differenciate them are the IP address ? I can't find any obvious setting in the sip.conf peer settings. The general section has "bindaddr" which would make sense, but since it's general and not per peer it's of no use Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML a...

Hello, Im reading through some manuals, but I cannot find my answer. I have a file containing many data: Vpn Code Family Age F1 F2 ... F17 1 1 M 46 1 2 ... 1 2 1 D 18 3 2 ... 4 3 2 M 50 3 3 ... 3 ... and so on. Now I can read it by: F = read.table("file", header=T) but now I want to seperate the mothers (M) and daugthers (D) of the family with all the data in all other fields.

....000000000 0.00000000 symbian 0.000000000 0.00000000 unknown 0.003759398 0.08219078 windows 0.021158528 0.32916970 the predictors are integers. is the first column for the 0 predictors and the second for all non-0? Is there a way to ask naiveBayes to differenciate between non-0 values? thanks! -- Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on Ubuntu 11.10 (oneiric) X 11.0.11004000 http://www.childpsy.net/ http://ffii.org http://www.PetitionOnline.com/tap12009/ http://mideasttruth.com http://iris.org.il http://openvotingconsortium.org The program isn't debu...

...with older > qemus, we essentially need a quirk that will make all virtio devices > assume that property is present. That will of course break whenever we > try to use another implementation of virtio on powerpc which doesn't > bypass the iommu. > > We don't have a way to differenciate a virtio device that does the > bypass from one that doesn't and the backward compatibility requirement > forces us to treat all existing virtio devices as doing bypass. The problem here is that in some of the problematic cases the virtio driver may not even be loaded. If someone runs a...

.../* Qumranet donated their vendor ID for devices 0x1000 thru 0x10FF. > */ > static const struct pci_device_id virtio_pci_id_table[] = { > ??????? { PCI_DEVICE(0x1af4, PCI_ANY_ID) }, > ??????? { 0 } > }; > > Can we match on that range? We can, but the problem remains, how do we differenciate an existing device that does bypass vs. a newer one that needs the IOMMU and thus doesn't have the new "bypass" property in the device-tree. Cheers, Ben.

.../* Qumranet donated their vendor ID for devices 0x1000 thru 0x10FF. > */ > static const struct pci_device_id virtio_pci_id_table[] = { > ??????? { PCI_DEVICE(0x1af4, PCI_ANY_ID) }, > ??????? { 0 } > }; > > Can we match on that range? We can, but the problem remains, how do we differenciate an existing device that does bypass vs. a newer one that needs the IOMMU and thus doesn't have the new "bypass" property in the device-tree. Cheers, Ben.

Hello community, I have successfully set up asterisk free PBX server and I am also able to connect to it by softphone. Now as next step I want to extend this to PSTN , My Required scenario: I need a number which will connect outside PSTN world to my PBX and by applying extension particular softphone or connected normal phone should get connected. Which hardware I need for it. Also please

...<jjelen at redhat.com>: > This is very strict condition. For the tools, I would rather have a look at > the full path (if it is possible), because in most of the cases, the files > should come under /etc/ssh/ssh_config.d/* Well, if it's not strict enough it will make it hard to differenciate different kind of ssh configurations. And this would only covers configuration in /etc, not the ones in ~/.ssh, so it would be necessary to add ~/.ssh/ssh_config.d/ to the list. > Having this path automatically included by default in shipped configuration > files from OpenSSH upstream would...

...e to having a real VoIP testing system The question I have is this one: given that one service gives me a 80ms ping (pretty consistantly) and another one gives me 30ms (again very consistently), is this 50ms difference enough to impact perceived call quality? Or will the quality be impossible to differenciate, and I should choose based on some other criteria? (customer service, price, etc) The thing is I can`t really see a difference myself, but I am told that my hearing isn`t that great so I should judge based on that. While I`m here, might as well ask this: is there a decent call quality software av...

...4 /* SCTP checksum offload support */ > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_MAC 5 /* Host has given MAC address. */ > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_TSO4 7 /* Guest can handle TSOv4 in. */ > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_TSO6 8 /* Guest can handle TSOv6 in. */ Is this a guest or a host checksum? We should differenciate between the two. > @@ -101,6 +102,7 @@ struct virtio_net_config { > struct virtio_net_hdr_v1 { > #define VIRTIO_NET_HDR_F_NEEDS_CSUM 1 /* Use csum_start, csum_offset */ > #define VIRTIO_NET_HDR_F_DATA_VALID 2 /* Csum is valid */ > +#define VIRTIO_NET_HDR_F_CSUM_NOT_INET 4...

...4 /* SCTP checksum offload support */ > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_MAC 5 /* Host has given MAC address. */ > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_TSO4 7 /* Guest can handle TSOv4 in. */ > #define VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_TSO6 8 /* Guest can handle TSOv6 in. */ Is this a guest or a host checksum? We should differenciate between the two. > @@ -101,6 +102,7 @@ struct virtio_net_config { > struct virtio_net_hdr_v1 { > #define VIRTIO_NET_HDR_F_NEEDS_CSUM 1 /* Use csum_start, csum_offset */ > #define VIRTIO_NET_HDR_F_DATA_VALID 2 /* Csum is valid */ > +#define VIRTIO_NET_HDR_F_CSUM_NOT_INET 4...

...guest to hypervisor communication. I'm not sure I see the problem, see below > When we do (as is the case with PLATFORM_IOMMU right now) this adds a > bunch of overhead which we need to get rid of if we are to switch to > PLATFORM_IOMMU by default. We need to fix that. So let's differenciate the two problems of having an IOMMU (real or emulated) which indeeds adds overhead etc... and using the DMA API. At the moment, virtio does this all over the place: if (use_dma_api) dma_map/alloc_something(...) else use_pa The idea of the patch set is to do two, somewhat orthogonal, change...

...guest to hypervisor communication. I'm not sure I see the problem, see below > When we do (as is the case with PLATFORM_IOMMU right now) this adds a > bunch of overhead which we need to get rid of if we are to switch to > PLATFORM_IOMMU by default. We need to fix that. So let's differenciate the two problems of having an IOMMU (real or emulated) which indeeds adds overhead etc... and using the DMA API. At the moment, virtio does this all over the place: if (use_dma_api) dma_map/alloc_something(...) else use_pa The idea of the patch set is to do two, somewhat orthogonal, change...

I can't figure out exactly what to put as my Icecast webroot directory, nor what to tell my Winamp Oddcast plugin to name as the mountpoint. I'm a n00b here and barely know what these words even mean, lol, but I can get the Oddcast to log in to the Icecast and people can go to the .m3u file I put into the mountpoint, but it either just cycles songs or doesn;t play. I noticed that it only

...optional filter, so only the users with the correct attribute will have access to a specific service (I separate the users that can log to their Unix account onto the machine from the suers that can use a specific service on that machine). Is there a similar filter with Samba or should I differenciate with the use/unuse of objectClass sambaSamAccount? - All what I read so far mention updating the sambaLMPassword and sambaNTPassword with the command smbpasswd. I already have a set of tools that I use to manage the users account (and that synchronize account/password on many systems (databa...

...ng vfio, then > *boom* L1 crashes.? (Same if, say, DPDK gets used, I think.) > > > > > The only way out of this while keeping the "platform" stuff would be to > > also bump some kind of version in the virtio config (or PCI header). I > > have no other way to differenciate between "this is an old qemu that > > doesn't do the 'bypass property' yet" from "this is a virtio device > > that doesn't bypass". > > > > Any better idea ? > > I'd suggest that, in the absence of the new DT binding, we assume...

...ng vfio, then > *boom* L1 crashes.? (Same if, say, DPDK gets used, I think.) > > > > > The only way out of this while keeping the "platform" stuff would be to > > also bump some kind of version in the virtio config (or PCI header). I > > have no other way to differenciate between "this is an old qemu that > > doesn't do the 'bypass property' yet" from "this is a virtio device > > that doesn't bypass". > > > > Any better idea ? > > I'd suggest that, in the absence of the new DT binding, we assume...