search for: repurposing

Hi all, Don''t suppose there''s an IRC bot I can use (or repurpose) for cc.rb notifications? Will.

It's that time again. I'm stuck with a bunch of older Powermac G4's that I either need to repurpose or give the heave ho. I've not tried CentOS on Mac hardware before. Would the following config be suitable for a (somewhat slow) workstation? PowerMac G4 400mhz 256mb RAM 40gig ATA disk Some sort of dual-head ATI video setup with 64mb VRAM (I've forgotten which cards they

So I'm in a bit of a pickle ... I have a machine that needs to be repurposed from WinXP to CentOS. I downloaded the CentOS DVD and all then realized ... I don't have a keyboard/mouse for the machine. It only has USB ports on it, and I don't have a single available USB keyboard that I can plug in. Bit of a problem. Usually what I do is install via VNC anyway, but that is contingent

Hi there, I'm trying to repurpose an unused machine (athlon XP 3000+) for my young daughter to use. It's on a motherboard with a VIA KT880 chipset and VIA integrated soundcard (VIA 8237). The card seems to be detected during boot time and shows up in the system log, but when I try to actually use the sound card within Gnome, there's no sound. The device is detected, but

Hi, Thanks for the pointers. My patch now calls the attribute "noduplicate", and updates CodeMetrics to have another field: bool notDuplicatable; Which semantically is "containsIndirectBr || containsNoDuplicateInst". I didn't repurpose containsIndirectBr because I felt what I'm looking for is sufficiently different (indirectbr inhibits inlining, whereas noduplicate

...er bricks > based on the guidelines in the doc [1], you can do it live and you will > have the distribution count also unchanged. I can probably find one or more machines with a few hundred GB free which could be allocated for arbiter bricks if it would be sigificantly simpler and safer than repurposing the existing bricks (and I'm getting the impression that it probably would be). Does it particularly matter whether the arbiters are all on the same node or on three separate nodes? -- Dave Sherohman

.... The "same version" assertion isn't completely true, at a previous job we had clients who preferred not to regenerate profile data unless they actually had to (because it was a big pain and took a long time). But as long as the versioning is based on actual format changes, not just repurposing the current LLVM version number (making the previous data unusable for no technical reason), that's okay. As long as I'm bothering to say something, is there some way that the tools will figure out that you're trying to apply old data to new files that have changed in ways that make th...

...his thread. The goal is to factor and reuse the code that we need to reinvent every time we need to extend the dynamic range of some of cost metric. The question here is whether that in itself a worthwhile goal, independent of how the compiler models language level floats. I have nothing *against* repurposing APFloat. After all, we only have a couple metrics in tree that need this new utility. But let’s be clear that APFloat's purpose is completely different, so it’s not like we’re reinventing any existing utility. I honestly think we should consider not calling this a Float at all just to avoid th...

Hi Greg, I'm afraid I've not looked into the infrastructure Jim put into place, so I've not really been able to answer the "how should I do it" questions, but hopefully I can comment on the ABI. > And probably questions for Tim, are these "section-relative" mapping > symbols, as defined in 4.6.5.1 of the ELF for ARM document? Yes, they are. > And what

On Dec 3, 2012, at 9:48 AM, James Molloy <James.Molloy at arm.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the pointers. My patch now calls the attribute "noduplicate", > and updates CodeMetrics to have another field: > > bool notDuplicatable; > > Which semantically is "containsIndirectBr || containsNoDuplicateInst". I > didn't repurpose

I would like to have tags mandatory in my app. The following keeps giving me error that params is nill. def validate() if (@params[:tags]) errors.add(@params[:tags], ":tags must be entered ") end end Why cannot I access params in my model class? The field for tags is called "tags" How else can I add an error using errors.add? I

Am Do., 8. Nov. 2018 um 10:36 Uhr schrieb David Greene <dag at cray.com>: > What about load prefetching vs. non-temporal stores on X86? There's a > limited number of write-combining buffers but prefetches "just" use the > regular load paths. Yes, there's a limited number of load buffers but I > would expect the the number of independent prefetch streams one

...the guidelines in the doc [1], you can do it live and you will > > have the distribution count also unchanged. > > I can probably find one or more machines with a few hundred GB free > which could be allocated for arbiter bricks if it would be sigificantly > simpler and safer than repurposing the existing bricks (and I'm getting > the impression that it probably would be). Yes it is the simpler and safer way of doing that. > Does it particularly matter > whether the arbiters are all on the same node or on three separate > nodes? > No it doesn't matter as long...

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:00:29PM +0530, Karthik Subrahmanya wrote: > I will try to explain how you can end up in split-brain even with cluster > wide quorum: Yep, the explanation made sense. I hadn't considered the possibility of alternating outages. Thanks! > > > It would be great if you can consider configuring an arbiter or > > > replica 3 volume. > >

Hi there. I got myself a pair of old Intel Xeon blades, which I plan to repurpose with CentOS. The model is : HP bl20p-g3 server blade Manual http://h18004.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/12322_ca/12322_ca.pdf Now, the main problem with this hardware is that LVD UW SCSI HDDs are hard to find and hella expensive if you find em (and of reduced capacity). Any of you know: 1. If there's any

Hi, TL;DR r317488 changed the way fast math flags are laid out in the bitcode and anyone compiling a pre-llvm-6.0 bitcode with llvm-6.0 will lose all the optimizations guarded by isFast and a pre-llvm-6.0 compiler compiling a llvm-6.0 bitcode will potentially generate incorrect code w.r.t. fast math expectations. Should we bump the bitcode version because of that and have the autoupgrader

...[1], you can do it live and you will > > > have the distribution count also unchanged. > > > > I can probably find one or more machines with a few hundred GB free > > which could be allocated for arbiter bricks if it would be sigificantly > > simpler and safer than repurposing the existing bricks (and I'm getting > > the impression that it probably would be). > > Yes it is the simpler and safer way of doing that. > > > Does it particularly matter > > whether the arbiters are all on the same node or on three separate > > nodes? &gt...

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 05:45:27PM +0530, Karthik Subrahmanya wrote: > > "In a replica 2 volume... If we set the client-quorum option to > > auto, then the first brick must always be up, irrespective of the > > status of the second brick. If only the second brick is up, the > > subvolume becomes read-only." > > > By default client-quorum is

On Apr 25, 2013, at 1:50 AM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > On 25 Apr 2013, at 01:01, Dan Gohman <dan433584 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> The main alternative approach that's been discussed is to do FastISel to a target-independent opcode set on MachineInstrs, and then do legalization and ultimately the last phase off

On Sep 13, 2011, at 1:05 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote: >> So where should I look for adding such support? Is MC JIT the direction? Does it purport to emit DWARF as well as executable code? Any pointers to relevant places in the code would be most appreciated. >> > > MC JIT is the direction that the JIT will be going in the future. Right now any debugging emission is minimal at