search for: mandat

Lets say you had a pretty decent job, but your company mandated use of emacs. The poaching employer offers you a free copy of Textmate(tm). Would you jump ship solely in order to use Textmate at company B? Cheers, Dave -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=732 Summary: Number of logins mandated by PAM doesn't work correctly Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 3.7.1p1 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: PAM support AssignedTo: openssh-bugs at mindro...

It's not found on Fermi. Signed-off-by: Roy Spliet <nouveau at spliet.org> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c | 13 ++++++++----- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c index 38a7e2b..eef09bf 100644 ---

Since we use APIs added in Jansson 2.7 (e.g. json_string_length), then raise the minimum version required to that version. Fixes commit bd1c5c9f4dcf38458099db8a0bf4659a07ef055d. --- docs/guestfs-building.pod | 2 +- m4/guestfs-libraries.m4 | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/guestfs-building.pod b/docs/guestfs-building.pod index bf80984e4..db429f1a9

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=732 djm at mindrot.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WORKSFORME ------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au 2004-01-22

...ris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > For those who don’t like it, is the currently documented policy broken > enough to be important to changing? I believe it is, simply for safety reasons. Adding a statement to a single-statement block can introduce bugs. Mandating braces everywhere prevents that. > I assume you wouldn’t recommend a massive rewrite of the codebase, so > we’re going to be with this for quite some time. Sure, that's unavoidable. But as code changes we can add braces where they're missing and reviews should catch cases where...

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=732 ------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au 2003-12-22 21:40 ------- Which PAM modules do you have in your sshd PAM stack? ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

...istory (and related in their implementation). 1) On some platforms > as.integer("0xA") [1] 10 but not all (not on Solaris nor Windows). We do not define what is allowed, and rely on the OS's implementation of strtod (yes, not strtol). It seems that glibc does allow hex: C99 mandates it but C89 seems not to allow it. I think that was a mistake, and strtol should have been used. Then C89 does mandate the handling of hex constants and also octal ones. So changing to strtol would change the meaning of as.integer("011"). Proposal: we handle this ourselves and defi...

...'t affect anyone here for Quite Some Time*, but here in the new world order of CentOS, I thought it might be useful to check with some actual downstream users. What do you think? Do you rely on hosts.allow/hosts.deny a primary security mechanism? As defense-in-depth? Do you have policies which mandate it? Your feedback appreciated. Thanks! * and the standard caveats that Fedora doesn't necessarily determine the path for RHEL apply, of course. -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/>

In a few weeks, no SIP call is going to terminate unless they are signed properly, as mandated by law. We are in the business of Stir-Shaken, signing calls, as an FCC-approved provider. A big differentiator between our service and the rest: we are the only ones who don't need to receive the calls in our servers to sign them. We do this over a MySQL call, easily connectable to Asterisk...

On 7 February 2014 00:19, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote: > This (-fexceptions and -g imply -funwind-tables) seems like it's probably > the right thing for most targets. With SjLj exceptions, -fexceptions > probably doesn't need -funwind-tables. > Thanks, I think that's the general consensus, yes. Do we have such logic in Clang at the moment? My

...gt; writes: > > > >> For those who don’t like it, is the currently documented policy broken > >> enough to be important to changing? > > > > I believe it is, simply for safety reasons. Adding a statement to a > > single-statement block can introduce bugs. Mandating braces everywhere > > prevents that. > > Sure, I get that. For background, the Swift language (which I was highly > involved in) mandates braces - I’m just saying that I'm aware of the > benefits and tradeoffs here. In addition to the “safety” advantages, there > are b...

...he value returned, for example why (-8)^(1/3) is NaN. For double inputs, R makes use of IEC 60559 arithmetic on all platforms, together with the C system function pow for the ^ operator. The relevant standards define the result in many corner cases. In particular, the result in the example above is mandated by the C99 standard. On many Unix-alike systems the command man pow gives details of the values in a large number of corner cases. ¿Qué opciones puedo utilizar para poder encontrar el resultado? Agradezco de antemano la colaboración. Cordial saludo. -- Alex Johann Zambrano Carbonell http://...

...t; >> then you are in the right directory. and it's OK as it's an algorithm that can be coded and made to work reliably. However, do I get it right that this is just a convention currently followed in virtio-win drivers? I.e. there's nothing in the Windows driver specifications mandating this versioning scheme? I'm trying to figure out how dependable it is. Besides, ATM there's at least one driver -- qemupciserial -- which doesn't fit in this scheme (or any scheme at all :). There are other peculiarities which we don't know what to do: - the netkvm driver dir...

On Dec 14, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >> Aha, this explains some apparently bizarre results such as the >> second one >> (018427, d) on this page: > Right. However, I saw the opposite case with sse2 code being 4x larger "return 1.0" is an example that is larger with SSE codegen, because the ABI requires stuff in the FP stack. X86-64

...on, but can we not choose to disable SSE code generating in a case-by-case basis, even when those optimizations are turned on? In that case, I imagine that 1.0 is considered double and would normally fill one or two registers, thus easy enough to return it via registers. Unless, of course, the ABI mandates that SSE is all-or-nothing... cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/ Reclaim your digital rights, eliminate DRM, learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm

...disable > SSE code generating in a case-by-case basis, even when those > optimizations are turned on? > > In that case, I imagine that 1.0 is considered double and would > normally fill one or two registers, thus easy enough to return it via > registers. Unless, of course, the ABI mandates that SSE is > all-or-nothing... ABI does not mandate the usage of SSE or x86 FP math exclusively. It just requires the FP values to be *always* returned via FP stack. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

Hi! I'd like to raise the question of whether we can drop the requirement of VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM from vdpa? As far as I can see, it is merely required for virtio vdpa - so should we not enforce it there? The point is support for legacy guests - which mostly just works on x86. Also, what is the plan for VIRTIO_F_ORDER_PLATFORM? -- MST

...ennies is braces add unnecessary clutter and impair readability when > used on a *single-line* statement. I count comments, that are on their > own line as statement(s). +1 for this. I think braces around single-line statements can be allowed, but they really shouldn't be mandated, and that's been my personal policy for reviews. In particular, if (!is_transform_applicable) { return {}; } is very aggravating clutter. Braces should be required around multi-line statements. Note: BAD: for (...) for (...) sing...

...ion on containers in the C++03 standard and I didn't see any paragraphs regarding the allocation strategy for classes like "set" or "map". The LLVM page seems to contain information that was based on some specific implementation (or several implementations), but was not mandated by the standard itself. -Krzysztof -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation