search for: fraught

...erver for DC an "demoted" this one to fileserver only and it's working like a charm. > > So I suppose the "single server" solution is not viable anyomre, or at least it doesn't seem so. > We have never recommended using a DC as a fileserver, it is possible, but fraught with problems. As you have found, it is better to run a DC and a separate fileserver. Rowland

...S that will work here. I believe related things have even been proven to show the brokenness of various algorithms. See https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00761505 section 4.1 Given the difficulties and subtleties here, I would consider any such approach that tried to share work between the passes as "fraught with peril" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170613/7e634774/attachment.html>

...d in the file and link that code to the runtime. The platforms we care about this working on is the x86, ppc, and sparc v9. While it would be nice to be able to build a runtime that only contains the absolute minimal, this seems rather non-trivial, but maybe I am wrong. If this is indeed involved, fraught with danger (ie, would make it impossible to debug) etc, let me know as well.If there is some other clever (or obvious) way to accomplish the same thing, I'd love to hear any ideas. -- -Alex

Hi folks I'm not sure what I am missing but I cannot find a predefined channel variable to identify the SIP peer/user which has initiated a call and established the channel. The one option is to extract it from the CHANNEL variable, but that is fraught with difficulties. Is there another variable I don't know about or another way to do this? Thanks in advance! Richard -- Richard Brady T: +44 (0)7771 623 348 E: rnbrady at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/piper...

I never said the team does recommend it, still I don't see the purpose of saying "it's possible" when can be "fraught with problems". Maybe the wiki [1] should be more explicit on this, despite discouraging and suggesting better options it doesn't say it's highly problematic, it's still offered as an option. https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Setting_up_Samba_as_an_Active_Directory_Domain_Controlle...

...of bytes of machine code and relocations to perform on it. This is exactly what you would need to do this. > While it would be nice to be able to build a runtime that only > contains the absolute minimal, this seems rather non-trivial, but > maybe I am wrong. If this is indeed involved, fraught with danger (ie, > would make it impossible to debug) etc, let me know as well.If there > is some other clever (or obvious) way to accomplish the same thing, > I'd love to hear any ideas. Another option might be to just fix building .dll's on windows :) -Chris -- http://nondot....

Hi Rowland, thanks for the quick response! -<| Quoting Rowland Penny via samba <rpenny at samba.org>, on Thursday, 2019-05-02 11:41:15 AM |>- > On Thu, 2 May 2019 11:59:45 +0200 > Philipp Gesang via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > Hey guys, > > > > on a machine with the role “member server”, joining AD requires > > setting

...randomisation test (and also calculate +/- CI). b) Regress the treatment vs control values, then randomise (with or without replacement?) individual values, comparing the true regression coefficient with the distribution of randomisation regression coefficients. Both approaches would appear to be fraught with risks; for example in the regression approach, it is probable that the error distribution of an individual randomised regression might not be normal - would this then invalidate the whole set of regressions? Many thanks for your advice. Roy -- Roy Sanderson Institute for Research on Environ...

Round-robin DNS last I checked can be fraught with issues. While doing something else I came up with this idea: Clients --> Load Balancer(HAProxy) --> Dovecot Proxy(DP) --> Dovecot Director(DD) --> MS1 / MS2. When DP checks say user100 it'll find a host=DD-POD1 that returns two IPs, those of the two DD that sit in front o...

Andrew, I very much appreciate your swift reply and your expertise. I readily admit I'm a little out of my depth here. I'm sitting here in California at almost midnight with just the weekend to get done all I need to do on the network and I fear this may be derailing my plans. This article on the Samba Wiki https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Changing_the_IP_Address_of_a_Samba_AD_DC seems to

...ndwidth, disk space, extra command to type initially?), Developer time, barrier to entry for new contributors. Getting the sparse-checkout business right looks like it is actually non-trivial and not recommended for the git novice. *Changing* the sparse-checkout configuration later appears to be fraught with peril (easy to get wrong). The claim is to keep the existing history (I.e. not hash changes) that is currently at http://llvm.org/git/llvm.git and continue to accumulate there any new commit that would touch the llvm subdirectory of the unified repo. This would be a read-only view of course,...

In my genridge package, I define a function ridge() for ridge regression, creating objects of class 'ridge' that I intend to enhance. In a documentation example, I want to use some functions from the car package. However, that package requires survival, which also includes a ridge() function, for coxph models. So, once I require(car) my ridge() function is masked, which means I have to

...ferred) exten => 3999,2,Hangup ; Next feature.... flash usage: From what I understand, SIP can relay flash events, so this is within the bounds of reason. This is not a high-priority issue for me, but it would be handy for managing transfers and whatnot. Using the "#" key is fraught with danger, especially when it is used in IVR menus on systems outside of the local PBX; I prefer "flash" since it's local-only, though having both "flash" and "#" would be great. If this transfer logic is already implemented, could someone please kindly...

Hello, My matrix multiplication code has variables allocated via double pointers on heap. The code is not getting vectorized. Following is the code. int **buffer_A = (int **)malloc(vecsize * sizeof(int *)); int **buffer_B = (int **)malloc(vecsize * sizeof(int *)); for(p = 0; p < vecsize; p++) { buffer_A[p] = (int *)malloc(vecsize * sizeof(int)); } for(p = 0; p < vecsize;

...to have the same declaration but different definitions. Mmm. So you want to warn the user that two libraries using different assertion settings both use the standard library? I think warning about actual differences in code, as opposed to differences in type/vtable layout, is going to be pretty fraught with uninteresting positives, but if you want to chase that rabbit, it's your time spent. Anyway, you only need to hash in function bodies for inline functions unless this is also an ELF abuse dectector. (*Whether* a function is inline seems like a legitimate thing to hash for the function si...

...ort of like a dashboard for each user. When they login without a sub domain, all their membership informaition, and cross-account information ( eg todo''s for all accounts ) would be available. When they log in with a sub domain, all information is scoped to the account. Is this thinking fraught with danger? or reasonably sane? Thanx for any insights. Daniel --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5...

...an instance method, that's not possible. Perhaps there should be a way in LLVM to specify predicates (or at least properties of global variables and parameters) that are known to be true at the start of each function... ? ----- In general, I agree with the idea that front-end annotations are fraught with questions and complexity. But the alternative requires expressing all that same information explicitly in LLVM, which is what I'm wondering about. ----- Trying to summarize this thread a bit, here is a list of some of the issues brought up relating to the goal of "best case" Ja...

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Archie Cobbs wrote: > Related idea.. what if all instructions (not just "invoke") could be > allowed to have an optional "except label ..."? This is the direction that we plan to go, when someone is interested enough to implement it. There are some rough high-level notes about this idea here:

...s in changing Instruction Sets over time. I think core system > functionality is invariant, but meta information, that is not essential > for the application to work should be pluggable too. As Chris mentioned, I would prefer that we keep annotations out of the core IR altogether as they are fraught with problems that are not easy to resolve. However, I understand where you're coming from in wanting to keep additional information with the bytecode. I have wanted the same thing for use by front end or specialized tools. For example an IDE that could keep track of source information or a lan...