search for: motiviated

I find it a little bit irritating when I receive a patch directly addressed to me to review, but I don't see the "00/34" cover letter. I want to see what this series is about, and what the motiviation for this change is. I'm also highly frustrated, in general, with mix-and-match CC: lists for patch series. Just put everyone relevant in the CC: for the entire series. That way

I find it a little bit irritating when I receive a patch directly addressed to me to review, but I don't see the "00/34" cover letter. I want to see what this series is about, and what the motiviation for this change is. I'm also highly frustrated, in general, with mix-and-match CC: lists for patch series. Just put everyone relevant in the CC: for the entire series. That way

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:56:03PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > > I find it a little bit irritating when I receive a patch directly > addressed to me to review, but I don't see the "00/34" cover letter. > > I want to see what this series is about, and what the motiviation > for this change is. > > I'm also highly frustrated, in general, with

There are some tools for handling genetic data in the 'genetics' package on CRAN. These were motiviated by the need to process population genetic data. -G > -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Edmund Davison [mailto:davison at midway.uchicago.edu] > Sent: Monday, May 05, 2003 1:58 PM > To: r-help at stat.math.ethz.ch > Subject: [R] DNA > > > > Hi, is anyone using...

[resend in plain text format] > On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 09:34 -0600, asterisk-users- > > request@lists.digium.com wrote: > > > I've been struggling with a test * install for a couple months now in a > > > small office and am just about ready to give up on it. It's not that the > > > system itself is a problem. I've got everything (attendant,

> On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 09:34 -0600, asterisk-users- > > request@lists.digium.com wrote: > > > I've been struggling with a test * install for a couple months now in a > > > small office and am just about ready to give up on it. It's not that the > > > system itself is a problem. I've got everything (attendant, voicemail, > > > FXS

Add optional MSI-X support: use a vector per virtqueue with fallback to a common vector and finally to regular interrupt. Teach all drivers to use it. I added 2 new virtio operations: request_vqs/free_vqs because MSI needs to know the total number of vectors upfront. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- Here's a draft set of patches for MSI-X support in the

Add optional MSI-X support: use a vector per virtqueue with fallback to a common vector and finally to regular interrupt. Teach all drivers to use it. I added 2 new virtio operations: request_vqs/free_vqs because MSI needs to know the total number of vectors upfront. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- Here's a draft set of patches for MSI-X support in the

This uses time, ASLR and pid for randomisation. (Closes: #516774) Signed-off-by: Thorsten Glaser <tg at mirbsd.org> --- usr/include/stdlib.h | 2 + usr/klibc/Kbuild | 2 +- usr/klibc/mkstemp.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) create mode 100644 usr/klibc/mkstemp.c diff --git a/usr/include/stdlib.h

Introduction ============ I'm currently in the middle of what initially looked to be a simple change in GVN but is turning out to have unexpected consequences that are turning out to be quite difficult to resolve, so I thought I'd send out an RFC to make sure that I'm not barking up the wrong tree with how I'm trying to do this. Motivation and current behaviour

Hello all, The topic of plugin dependencies has come up before and it doesn''t seem to have been addressed by core or core doesn''t seem to think it''s an issue. I''ve looked at the current edge code and don''t see anything new, so if I''ve missed something *please* let me know. The following article makes mention of a require_plugin

This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't

This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't