search for: inconsequent

On Mon, 24 Jun, at 10:27:52AM, Thomas B?chler wrote: > Am 24.06.2013 04:10, schrieb Gene Cumm: > > In trying Syslinux-6.00 bios/core/pxelinux.0 with a 3.0.21 kernel, I got" > > > > "No linux boot function registered for firmware > > Booting kernel failed: Bad file number" > > > > Using Syslinux-5.10, the same kernel/initrd succeeds. > >

Well, we like the operator because it maps cleanly to Fortran's ISHFTC intrinsic. There must also be other compilers out there, maybe catering to cryptos, that have their own intrinsic for circular shift in other languages. It seems wasteful for an optimizer to break apart an intrinsic into its elemental pieces in order for LLVM to put them back together. This was done in our compiler for some

...BIOS before releasing it. > > Urk, sorry about that. This is fixed in 6.01-pre1, which I just > released. > > This isn't the result of a failed merge, but I did (clearly) fail to > remember to test booting a kernel under BIOS before releasing 6.00. Thanks. It seems kind of inconsequent though: Why is EFI boot defined in efi/main.c, but BIOS boot in libcom32, instead of being part of the firmware definition? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 901 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital sign...

...' Try `iptables -h'' or ''iptables --help'' for more information. Error: Can''t add -A to zone br0_dynf Beendet BUT actually the host IS added to the group ''work'', and everything ist fine. But why then the error message? And it is something inconsequent since the group work is defined in /etc/shorewall/hosts as being attached to br0:eth1 and not to br0 ... Now, an issue of shorewall delete br0:192.168.2.10 work says very nicely: Loading /usr/share/shorewall/functions... Processing /etc/shorewall/params ... Processing /etc/shorewall/shorewall...