search for: inadequ

Package: xen-utils-3.2-1 Version: 3.2.1-2 Severity: normal When a DomU is defined as using a file: device the loopback driver will be used to make it appear to be a regular block device. The loopback driver will by default only support 8 nodes so this is a limited resource. http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/10/22/kernel-issues-with-debian-xen-and-centos-kernels/ If there is a problem that prevents

Package: xenstore-utils Version: 4.0.1-2 all it says is: "Description: Xenstore utilities for Xen This package contains the Xenstore utilities." Wow, i never would have guessed that a package called xenstore-utils might contain Xenstore utilities. I'm glad that's cleared up! that just leaves a few tiny, niggling questions: 1. WTF are the Xenstore utilities? 2. What are

R versions 2.1.0 to present. Examples shown were computed under Windows R-devel, current SVN, but ix86 Linux shows similar behaviour (sometimes NaN or -Inf rather than Inf, depending on the compiler and optimization level used). The replacement pgamma algorithm used from R 2.1.0 has an inadequate design and no supporting documentation whatsoever. There is no reference given to support the algorithm, and it seems very desirable to use only algorithms with a published (and preferably refereed) analysis, or at least of impeccable provenance. The following errors were found by investig...

All, similar to some mail threads found in this forum and some other xen-related threads, I had problems with the network performance of my test system: * software base of dom0/domU: RHEL5 (Xen 3.0.3, Redhat 2.6.18-8el5xen SMP kernel) * ibm x306 servers with 3Ghz P4 /MT support; coupled via Gigabit Ethernet switch * standard xen bridging network configuration * test tool: iperf * Xen

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > forcemerge 644125 466683 Bug #644125 [xenstore-utils] xenstore-utils has completely inadequate description Bug #466683 [xenstore-utils] xenstore-utils: The package description doesn't say what the utilities contained in the package are for. Severity set to 'normal' from 'minor' Marked as found in versions xen/4.0.1-2. Bug #644125 [xenstore-utils] xenstore-utils has com...

I'm using rsync to mirror files from a Windows XP machine mounted via smbfs. Apparently I have something configured wrong as I get a "permisson denied" error accessing some of the files on the smbfs mount with cp, od, etc. However, rsync produces no error messages on these files. It happily creates files in the target directory that are the right size, but filled with null bytes.

...use cases that autoconf+make can't support, so I'd rather we just pick cmake and bang on it until it works the way we want. Now hold on there. I thought Daniel was supposed to be working on a new build system, based almost entirely in Python, specifically because he thought CMake was, uh... inadequate (to say the least). I've CC'd him in the hopes of getting his opinion. On the other hand, +1 for gutting autoconf. I hate it, and it needs to die. Chip P.S. -- Chandler, please increase the font size in your mail client. It's very small and hard to read. -------------- next part -...

...ases that autoconf+make can't support, so I'd rather we just pick cmake and bang on it until it works the way we want. > Now hold on there. I thought Daniel was supposed to be working on a new build system, based almost entirely in Python, specifically because he thought CMake was, uh... inadequate (to say the least). I've CC'd him in the hopes of getting his opinion. > > I'd be interested what about CMake is inadequate. The way CMake is used in llvm seems somewhat suboptimal, but I don't see how doing the same thing in python would be better ... > > (not sayi...

...ake can't support, so I'd rather we just pick cmake and bang on > it until it works the way we want. > > Now hold on there. I thought Daniel was supposed to be working on a new > build system, based almost entirely in Python, specifically because he > thought CMake was, uh... inadequate (to say the least). I've CC'd him in > the hopes of getting his opinion. > I'd be interested what about CMake is inadequate. The way CMake is used in llvm seems somewhat suboptimal, but I don't see how doing the same thing in python would be better ... (not saying that cm...

...beginning of LLVM. My working assumption is that ADT didn't exist when LLVM started (whereas STL did). In such case, I'm assuming that creation of ADT was motivated by needs of LLVM that STL didn't meet. I'm trying to understand what the needs were and where STL was considered inadequate. Creating a new set of containers is an investment, so, again, I'm assuming that there were specific motives that caused that investment to be made. Benjamin's answer was actually very informative, that was that kind of information I was looking for. -Krzysztof -- Qualcomm Innova...

...version of PRE might have it. > Just placing the calls to free at the predecessors (dominated by BB12) of > the dominance frontier of BB12 seems to work, however. Is there anything > wrong with this? > It seems that placing the calls to free at the predecessors of dominance frontier is inadequate. It is possible that there are exit blocks that are dominated by BB12 (calls to malloc). I guess we can also insert calls to free at these exit blocks too. > H. > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Bin Tzeng <bintzeng at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >...

I'm running icecast 3.1.10 (from the ports collection) on a freebsd 4.3 machine with a hacked version of iceplay doing the encoding. With older version of icecast you could start multiple instances and tell iceplay to broadcast to each one of those instances with a different playlist. This version of icecast seems to only run one instance, even if I try to start more than one. So, I've

> > It seems that placing the calls to free at the predecessors of dominance > frontier is inadequate. It is possible that there are exit blocks that are > dominated by BB12 (calls to malloc). I guess we can also insert calls to > free at these exit blocks too. That crossed my mind a few minutes later. : ) If you're interested, PRE.cpp existed last at r25315. It calculates the "...

Thanks! I will try that and see whether it works. On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:01 AM, Henrique Santos < henrique.nazare.santos at gmail.com> wrote: > It seems that placing the calls to free at the predecessors of dominance >> frontier is inadequate. It is possible that there are exit blocks that are >> dominated by BB12 (calls to malloc). I guess we can also insert calls to >> free at these exit blocks too. > > That crossed my mind a few minutes later. : ) > > If you're interested, PRE.cpp existed last at r25315...

On Jan 20, 2013, at 7:46 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> It is one of the motivations. > > The reason I ask is that STL comes all ready, with containers and algorithms. They may not be optimal for every task, but they do their job and they are part of the standard. There may be some price to pay in terms of performance/memory usage/etc. for a

...rking on a legacy SQL db. It is distributed, to they are using the uniqueidentifier type for the primary key. At first, at least, I won''t be updating records, but I''m seeing a lot of negativity about using anything other than incrementing integers for the pk--which are obviously inadequate for this environment. It is enough to use set_primary_key? Do I need more? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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-t...

...t, so I'd rather we just pick cmake and bang on >> it until it works the way we want. >> >> Now hold on there. I thought Daniel was supposed to be working on a new >> build system, based almost entirely in Python, specifically because he >> thought CMake was, uh... inadequate (to say the least). I've CC'd him in >> the hopes of getting his opinion. >> > > I'd be interested what about CMake is inadequate. The way CMake is used in > llvm seems somewhat suboptimal, but I don't see how doing the same thing in > python would be bett...

TL;DR: It's okay to close a bug, if you can justify it properly. Recently there has been a spate of bug-closing with what I would call inadequate documentation. Comments such as "Obsolete?" or "I assume it's fixed" could be applied to nearly every open bug we have. While this does reduce the open bug count--something I have been watching with morbid fascination for years--I do fear that the reduction is potent...

...go. I guess the "Gurus" suffer from NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome. Given a "general purpose" system, tunability is a must. UNIX, as delivered by USL in such examples as Sys V, had tunables that let admins tune to their needs. A single "swappiness" value is woefully inadequate. Among the tunables were how much memory for cache, how much for buffers, how much for X/Y/Z, high and low water marks for all sorts of memory related stuff and a very valuable attribute bit for executables called the "sticky bit". It is not the "sticky bit" as used now. It...

...usiness. Whenever I've needed statistical analyses I've coded the algorithms myself, but my boss wants me to start learning and using R, to speed up development. I am very reluctuant to do this because I can't find adequate *programming* documentation for R (though I can find a lot of inadequate documentation). As far as I can tell, the R documentation may be adequate for end-users who don't plan to do much programming (if any at all), but it is completely unacceptable from the standpoint of programming. In a couple of simple exploratory projects I have been reduced to programming...