search for: realized

Hello! When I am analyzing proportion data, I usually apply logistic regression using a glm model with binomial family. For example: m <- glm( cbind("not realized", "realized") ~ v1 + v2 , family="binomial") However, sometimes I don't have the number of cases (realized, not realized), but only the proportion and thus cannot compute the binomial model. I just found out that the package car contains a function "logit" wh...

Hi all, I''m a new puppet user and I''m running into some weirdness around creating users on solaris. (puppet version 0.23.2) The virt_all_users way of managing users seems pretty reasonable, but I don''t see how to deal with user specific groups with that. I have: class virt_all_users { @user { "seph": ensure => "present",

Hi. I''ve defined a virtual user "kenneth", and depending on a variable in the node definiton I''d like to add the users to different groups. Consider this example: ###### Code start node "server.example.com" { $server_type = "typeA" realize User[kenneth] } @user {"kenneth": ensure => present, uid => 1000,

Hi,all I am using iproute2/tc to manage bandwidth and control traffic.I must realize these two tricky functions in mips linux(kernel 2.4.17): 1.The device MUST support the capability to fragment AF and BE traffic in order to constrain the perturbing impact of AF and BE packets on EF traffic delay, for example using a mechanism such as MLPPP LFI.(RFC1990) 2. The packet size threshold before

I''m trying to work with Users and the realize function, and it''s driving me batty. Puppet is 0.23.2. My definition looks something like: class virtual_users { @user { fred : uid => 500 ... } @user { derf : uid => 501 ... } } node base-node { include virtual_users } node "testnode.domain.local" inherits base-node { realize User[fred] } puppetd

I would like to write up brief tutorial/documentation on how to manage /etc/passwd using puppet. While this may seem pretty straight forward to some...the documentation is not. We have been able to create a manifest that defines all of our users "virtually" and are able to "realize" users and add them to the system(s) running puppetd. Is there a way to simply realize all users

I''m trying to do something like this using puppet 0.24.8. define removeuser() { @ user { $name: ensure => absent } realize User["$name"] } $removelist = ["bob", "bill", "billy"] @ removeuser { $removelist : } It''s failing with "err: Could not retrieve catalog: Failed to realize virtual resources User[bob] on node

I''m trying to use ssh_authorized_key to manage my user''s ssh keys. I basically have this (across a couple of files): class user::virtual { @user { "seph": ensure => "present", uid => "2001", comment => "seph", home => "/home/seph", shell =>

I am interested in creating multiple (say 1000) time series, from a given stochastic process, of length 250. I want to refer to each realization with its own variable name, of the format say, tsn, where n is the n'th simulation. i.e. ts1, ts2, ts3, ts4, .... , ts1000 The way I am thinking of doing this is placing the following code within another loop, and the 'tsn' assignment should

Hello, I use some define in classes like class foo { define bar() {} } before in .22.4 i had require => Bar[''mybar''] on object and it worked. Now i have : err: Could not apply complete configuration: Could not retrieve dependency ''Shorewall-realize[shorewall.conf]'' at /etc/puppet/manifests/classes/shorewall.pp: for exemple. Do anyone knwo why it

hi ,all When realizing a resources ,can use this syntax like this ? File <<| tag == $idc | >> I had try it ,but can''t work. and not get error from the puppetmaster. -- Huang Mingyou

hello R-masters. i have an R-issue here that i don't know if you'd wish to help me? about it: briefly i'd like to generate many (say hundred) realizations of a random walk, execute a few operations on each of them (mean time of return), and graph each realization on the same plot. IN OTHER WORDS I'D LIKE TO IMPOSE A LOOPING CYCLE TO THE COMMAND NOT THE ARGUMENT OF THE COMMAND.

Hi, This follows on a bit from the previous thread ''trouble with hiera and puppet defines'' [1] Up to now I''ve had a large file of virtual resources and then enabled them on demand on various services. The very standard. @metric{''1234: one => 1 two => [1,2] } @metric{''abcd'': one => a, two => [b,c] } and

Hello folks, As we rebuild all of our servers from a variety of distributions to one standardised distribution, we''re running into the fact that several servers have conflicting ideas of who UID 501 is. Since we''re rebuilding, that''s not really an issue - I''ve started at 500 in a virtual_users.pp file, and I''m realizing users in the per-node

I have split my original dataframe to generate a list of dataframes each of which has 3 columns of factors and a 4th column of numeric data. I would like to use lapply to apply the fitdistr() function to only the 4th column (x$isi) of the dataframes in the list. Is there a way to do this or am I misusing lapply? As a second solution I tried splitting only the numeric data column to yield a

Hi list, We use samba 4.1.17 (debian's version) on several DCs. I just realized that one of them is desynced and cannot get it to resync. The long story: we got 5 DCs splitted over several sites. Recently we had to replace one of them (let's call him DC5). Since both had to run in parallel for data recovery/users work we decided to join a brand new DC (DC6) and latter...

...idea is to realize the vfio device but not expose it > to guest. Have a separate command to expose it to guest. > Hotunplug would also hide it from guest but not unrealize it. So, this would not be real hot(un)plug, but 'hide it from the guest', right? The concept of "we have it realized in QEMU, but the guest can't discover and use it" should be translatable to non-pci as well (at least for ccw). > > This will help ensure that e.g. on migration failure we can > re-expose the device without risk of running out of resources. Makes sense. Should that 'hidden...

Hi All, I asked on IRC but didn''t have everything organized and most people seemed busy. Hoping someone can see what I''m missing here. I''m trying to create a network module, used similar to the ''users'' configuration described in the Best Practices document. I have a users module which has that and it works with similar syntax to below. If I

I've got some calls like: musttail call void bitcast (i32 (i32, i8*, %Type*)* @MyMethod to void (i32, i8*)*)(i32 %0, i8* %1) ret void Into something like: %8 = tail call i32 @MyMethod(i32 %0, i8* %1, %Type* null) ret void I realize I'm losing a parameter there, but this is an interface jump trick I use and relies on the end code being a 'jmp' (x86). I realize i can probably

Dear all, We are trying to clean multiple realizations of a pattern. Erroneous NODATA and spurious DATA occur in the realizations. As we have to do a 1000 realizations for many patterns, efficiency of the code is important. We need to correct the realizations with a 'mask' pattern of DATA/NODATA. We think an ifelse should do the job. Spurious DATA will be simply removed using the