search for: mandator

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 mindrot.org

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

Chris 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

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.

These are some points stimulated by reading about C history (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

Does anyone use tcp wrappers (hosts.allow/hosts.deny) anymore? And, would you care strongly if it went away (or would you just migrate to something else)? I bring this up because we are discussing dropping it from Fedora. This would be far enough in the future that it wouldn't impact RHEL 7, and therefore won't affect anyone here for Quite Some Time*, but here in the new world order of

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 via

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

At the very least, I accept clarifying the wording to make it clear where braces should/shouldn't be used. I personally would still prefer a general "always add braces in new code" rule, given that I literally just ran into another case where a code change I made locally caused test failures because I'd forgotten to add the braces on a previously single-line if, although in this

Hola a tod en s. Realizando el calculo de encontrar la raíz quinta de -0.5, la cual dígito de la siguiente manera (-0.5)^(1/5) El resultado que me arroja R es NaN. Averiguando un poco entre las ayuda de las funciones aritméticas encuentro el siguiente comentario Users are sometimes surprised by the value returned, for example why (-8)^(1/3) is NaN. For double inputs, R makes use of IEC 60559

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 10:33:57AM +0200, Yan Vugenfirer wrote: > > On 29 Oct 2015, at 10:28, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 11:05:42AM +1100, Vadim Rozenfeld wrote: > > > > Seems like looking at this field in the .inf file is better than our > > current approach of matching path names. > > You just need to

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

2009/12/15 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: > "return 1.0" is an example that is larger with SSE codegen, because > the ABI requires stuff in the FP stack.  X86-64 doesn't have this issue. This might be a very stupid question, 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

> This might be a very stupid question, 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 >

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

Did this conversation reach a conclusion? My ad hoc tally says that a slight majority of the responders preferred to fully brace statements and no one wanted to totally eliminate braces. The technical arguments for fully braced statements were 1) it's considered a slightly safer coding style and 2) commit diffs with fully braced statements may be slightly more to the point. I didn't

On 1/19/2013 10:00 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Jan 19, 2013, at 7:04 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> >> Were the "small n" characteristics the main motivation? > > It is one of the motivations. What were the others? The reason I ask is that STL comes all ready, with containers and algorithms. They may not be optimal for