search for: obviat

...ire rspec stuff. Since the plugins haven''t been loaded yet it gets the gem version. afaik the solution is to build a new gem. However I don''t want to have to tell my team members to update their gem every single day. Also I think including rspec in vendor/plugins is supposed to obviate that anyway, but this is probably just some path loading stuff. Anyone else run into this? How do you handle it? Pat

hi all, curious is anyone has successfully sent http get packets to userspace for blacklist filtering ... i''d like to do a live cd that would obviate the neccessity to install squid and squidguard, but rather, have iptables send packets to squidguard (or something else) directly ... cheers charles

All, Just a note to let yo know that CVS Head has been changed so that the AsmParser no longer recognizes the "implementation" keyword and AsmWriter no longer generates it. The grammar has changed to require the "define" keyword for function definitions which obviates the need for the implementation keyword. This has been the case for a couple months now, but we never removed the keyword. It is now gone and so your previous .ll files with implementation keyword need to be updated. The llvm-upgrade tool will remove the implementation keyword. Reid.

...round 3ish. Though maybe it's somehow dependent upon when I update the mirror?? Unfortunately, because we now have people working on LLVM around the clock (hi Anton! :-) ), pretty much anytime for the sync is going to be a problem for someone. The good news is that this problem will be obviated in about a month! :-) -bw

...LoopExitValues > pass may increase some live range significantly in certain cases > because it reuses value cross outerloop iterations. Like the following > hypothetical case, the value reuse will create a live range living > across loop2, loop3, .... But we can add some simple logic to obviate > such case. > Thanks Wei. Can you please give your ideas about logic to catch abuse of live ranges?

...implementation. > > Does this mean C programs would require a C++ runtime? If not, how will > the project ensure that? > > Shooting from the hip: no. Turning off exceptions, RTTI, and static > initializers (i.e., things which require a guard variable) is probably > enough to obviate the need for the runtime. What about bits of the standard library that are not header-only? My guess is that the set of those things may be platform-dependent. -David

...way, here is my question: Does running rsync in daemon mode on the remote host preclude the need to use SSH from the client? If so, how secure is this versus using rsync in non daemon mode with SSH? I have considered building SSH to not use encryption, but I was thinking rsync in daemon mode might obviate the need to have to use SSH if it can still be made secure. Thanks. George Sinclair | george.sinclair@noaa.gov

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:22:33AM -0800, Shuxin Yang wrote: > I do some google, I cannot find the answer... > I check C std, I cannot find answer either. > > Delete infinite empty loop is boring, but if C/C++ lawyers could tell it > is safe to to so, > it would obviate the need to prove a non-countable loop infinite or not > before > DCE can delete it. > > That is the answer I'm waiting for to delete a disgusting dead > non-countable loop in my way. Perhaps Duncan will give you a proper keyword to search in GCC/LLVM ML archieve. I found...

I do some google, I cannot find the answer... I check C std, I cannot find answer either. Delete infinite empty loop is boring, but if C/C++ lawyers could tell it is safe to to so, it would obviate the need to prove a non-countable loop infinite or not before DCE can delete it. That is the answer I'm waiting for to delete a disgusting dead non-countable loop in my way. On 11/14/2012 12:14 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Shuxin, > >> Is it legal to delete empty infinite...

...en I update the mirror?? >>> >>> Unfortunately, because we now have people working on LLVM around the >>> clock (hi Anton! :-) ), pretty much anytime for the sync is going to >>> be a problem for someone. The good news is that this problem will be >>> obviated in about a month! :-) >>> >>> -bw >>> > > I delayed it to 3:40am. We'll see if that's late enough. The answer is no. It is not late enough. llvm-gcc failed to build as a result (yet again) and the nightly tester did not run.

The intent of this option is similar to "tls-auth" in openvpn[1]: To refuse to talk to anyone who doesn't know the shared secret. You could compare this to port knocking, in that it solves a similar problem. This also prevents RST attacks from killing an existing connection, even when attacker can sniff sequence numbers. This feature doesn't work through NAT, since the source

Has there been any thought given to implementing authentication via an LDAP 'bind', rather than by a password lookup and hash comparison? doing a bind would obviate the need to make the passwords readable by the dovecot process and would lend itself to improved security. Phillip Needham Principal, iBright Consulting phillip at ibright.net 614-783-3301

...serving - AV server - Linux 1 - presently joined to domain - slave DNS/LDAP - primary file server - primary SMB HOME/PROFILES and SHARES - Linux 2 - presently BDC-soon PDC - web & mail server - master DNS/LDAP - DHCP server Should I be running winbind on Linux 1? Does Samba 3.0.0 with LDAP obviate the need to fix signorseal registry on WinXP Prof clients? How about if I get kerberos working? Thanks, Craig

...gt; > Just a note to let yo know that CVS Head has been changed so that the > AsmParser no longer recognizes the "implementation" keyword and > AsmWriter no longer generates it. The grammar has changed to require the > "define" keyword for function definitions which obviates the need for > the implementation keyword. This has been the case for a couple months > now, but we never removed the keyword. It is now gone and so your > previous .ll files with implementation keyword need to be updated. The > llvm-upgrade tool will remove the implementation keyword...

...maybe it's somehow dependent upon when I update the mirror?? > > Unfortunately, because we now have people working on LLVM around the > clock (hi Anton! :-) ), pretty much anytime for the sync is going to > be a problem for someone. The good news is that this problem will be > obviated in about a month! :-) > > -bw I delayed it to 3:40am. We'll see if that's late enough.

Hi Folks, Let's keep this optimization alive. To summarize: several folks voiced general support, but with questions about why existing optimizations do not already catch this case. Deep dive by Wei Mi showed that the optimization is most likely not a clean-up of LSR sloppiness, but something new. Follow-up by myself confirmed that the redundancy eliminated the LoopExitValues pass exists in

...use tricks - AliasAnalysis has become even more important (extended to codegen time etc) and relies heavily on distinguishing between allocas. - We have lots of tools like the sanitizers that directly reason about allocas to catch bugs in user programs. The first two changes pretty much completely obviate the need for alloca merging as far as I'm aware, and the second two changes make the information loss caused by this practice, IMO, really bad. Even if there are problems exposed by turning off alloca merging in the inliner, they are almost certainly deficiencies in stack coloring, Clang, or...

Dear all, What does <DYN> (or say "dynamic node" that is generated by paser and used by cg in compilation stage) represent? What are the corresponding D lanauge futures of this? Any examples? TIA! Regards, TJ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Thanks Michael. Here is my (slightly corrected) version of the script, after I''ve done a bit of investment in the dtrace manual (always knew it''s powerful, but it''s more than that...). While it appears to run, and when I tried lowering the limit I started getting results, I''d appreciate it if you could please explain the actions attached to the last few probes

Bonjour a Tous, I would like to generate (on the fly) a list "popbeforesmtp" when dovecot POP/IMAP authentication succeed. Intended Format will/should be such as: 'timestamp_in_second' user_id remote_ip one user per line. My guess we have all the needed information within dovecot to make such list. But I have seen no way to 'trick' dovecot (dovecot-1.0.alpha3)