search for: particpating

Dear All, Within the past few months, there have been several discussions that relate to LLVM and its sub-projects (such as the discussions on moving to Git and the Code of Conduct). To ensure that these discussions reach all community members, people have been cross-posting these messages to llvmdev, cfe-dev, and every other -dev you can think of. This is becoming a headache for me (and

Dear list, I have following data, where I want to check if any value in each column is out of range. For example, column "f1" can only take values 1-5, so if any values less than 1 or > 5 will be defined as missing value (i.e. NA), column "f4" can only take values of 1-3 and any values that are outside this interval will be considered as missing values. The below

+1 to do something, whether that something is to mail only on llvm-dev, or to move those discussions to a 'community' or 'cross-project' list of some sort. I -am- subscribed to cfe-def and llvm-dev, and as a result, I get most of these messages twice. I also have mail rules to put cfe-dev email in one folder and llvm-dev email in another folder. When both mailing lists are

The bridge list is open for outside posting, but I can close it if needed. The rationale is that I don't want to lose any problem reports from non-particpants. OSDL does enforce a number of anti-spam measures on incoming mail, but some will inevitably get through. If it gets to be a problem or you suspect other problems please notify me. -- Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>

Hello, I am planning using Samba (on Solaris 7) as a PDC for Windows NT4 & 2000 Server. Connecting it to a LDAP server. There will be 4 different PDC (1 in each DMZ) sharing the same username (same LDAP server). I want to know the major difference between Samba 2 and Samba 3, which one is more stable and which one would fix better in my architecture plans. Thanks Fran?ois Bousquet Email

Good morning. We have a 6 node cluster. 3 nodes are participating in a replica 3 volume. Naming convention: xx01 - 3 nodes participating in ovirt_vol xx02 - 3 nodes NOT particpating in ovirt_vol Last week, restarted glusterd on each node in cluster to update (one at a time). The three xx01 nodes all show the following in glusterd.log: [2018-02-26 14:31:47.330670] E [socket.c:2020:__socket_read_frag] 0-rpc: wrong MSG-TYPE (29386) received from 172.26.30.9:24007 [2018-02-26 14...

...ndamentals "bricks" to describe outputs (footnote, p-value, comment, are some sample such "bricks") - implementing functions that describes some standards outputs - implementing exporting drivers: LaTeX, native PDF, RTF, raw tex - ... Please let me know if you are interested in particpating to this project. If there are enough participants, I will consider using a shared platform such as freshmeat or other. Eric Eric Lecoutre UCL / Institut de Statistique Voie du Roman Pays, 20 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve Belgium tel: (+32)(0)10473050 lecoutre at stat.ucl.ac.be http://www.stat.ucl.ac....

When switching from kthreads to vhost_tasks two bugs were added: 1. The vhost worker tasks's now show up as processes so scripts doing ps or ps a would not incorrectly detect the vhost task as another process. 2. kthreads disabled freeze by setting PF_NOFREEZE, but vhost tasks's didn't disable or add support for them. To fix both bugs, this switches the vhost task to be thread in the

So, I''ve been listing to stuff folks have been saying about the Bookman font we use. Most people like the font, but some feel there aren''t enough words/line, so your eyes move too much. So, I spent the weekend playing with typography, and I''ve come up with a compromise. The thing is: it looks good to me, but I don''t want to mess up the read for others

Greetings All, Can someone please try to answer a few questions for me regarding TINC so that it might clear up some things that I can trying to get a better picture on. 1. I am trying to understand the ideas that allow a TINC host to join multiple networks which raise questions. What prevents a user from joining multiple networks without authorization to join. How is that authorization

For ISO C++ we long ago created an 'all' list for topics that were organisational and not technically specific to an aspect of the Standard such as Library, or Core, or Extensions, etc.. For the most part I think that since the early 1990s when these lists started, the 'all' reflector/distribution-list has worked really well. I still get all the ISO C++ mailings, and the signal