search for: retroactive

Anyone (Jack?) see the story on /. yesterday about the webcasting rates? Won't that kill all Internet radio under a huge burden of cost? <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the

...the story on /. yesterday about the webcasting rates? > > Won't that kill all Internet radio under a huge burden of cost? > > Are you saying it wasn't already dying? :) > > Those are set in stone, but similar rates and terms probably soon will > be. Remember, they are retroactive to 1998 or so. > > Someone was saying the big broadcasters (Spinner/NetRadio/Live365) owe > on the order of $225,000/mo retroactively. Heh :) I haven't run the > numbers but I don't think anyone but aol really has that kind of money > :) How can anyone make retroac...

...ctations of a Windows client. According to this M$ Article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/129574/en-us "When Windows NT automatically adjusts for daylight savings time, the times on files on Windows NT file system (NTFS) partitions and the events in the event logs are retroactively shifted by one hour, even though the files and event records were created before the daylight savings time change." In other words, Linux-based Samba servers keep on showing the right time of the day when a file was created/changed/modified/accessed whereas Windows falsifies it...

I am using RODBC to collect data from an ODBC connection to an MS Access Database. Everything seems to be working well except datetimes between March 12, 2006 02:00 and 02:59 get moved one hour forward. This does not seem to be happening with Excel connecting to the same connection. March 12 seems a bit early for Daylight savings time. What am I doing wrong? R 2.5.0 Windows XP with the

Hello Syslinux Team, To reduce the recurrent issues regarding new locations for binary files (bios/efi32/efi64), I'd like to suggest adding this important change to NEWS, in the "6.00" section (not retroactively, of course, just from now on). IMHO, this is the most simple way for users to clearly notice this relevant change. When users want to find out "what's new" (even retroactively), they usually read the NEWS / change-log / history files. By adding this change in NEWS (under &quot...

...ybe_divide`, that's buggy for a different reason. > such runtime behavior difference may not specific to multi-TU definition > scenario. The multi-TU constraint is relevant here because the linker may legally replace a `readnone` version of `maybe_divide` with version that reads memory; retroactively invalidating the optimization above. If there is only one TU, then the `maybe_divide` the optimizer sees is what the final executable gets; and all is well. -- Sanjoy

Full_Name: Robert Baer Version: 2.6.1 OS: Windows XP Submission from: (NULL) (198.209.172.95) It would be wonderful if the CRAN mirror had an easy way to set a "default CRAN mirror". Current behavior is to have to choose a CRAN mirror the first time a package is installed in a session. The closest mirror site is always the same for me, and I wouldn't wish to change it unless it

...from maildir to mdbox. It went smoothly and the performance has been great. However, I have two questions regarding the process. First, I failed to notice the fairly low default mdbox_rotate_size, and I changed it in dovecot.conf after the migration. Is it possible to somehow make that change retroactive, to coalesce the couple thousand "storage/m.*" files that are anywhere from a few hundred bytes up to a few megabytes, into a smaller number of larger files, without re-doing the migration? Second, I'd like to delete the old maildir files and directories to reclaim the space in the...

...s of positive/negative returns rather than specifically -1/+1). A third case had its pointer arithmetic entirely replaced with memcpy(). In addition, remove redundant casts of void pointers and assertions. This fixes Coverity IDs 1135373 1135374 1135375 1135376 1135377 1135378 11353739 which were retroactively identified following modelling improvements. Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Tested-by: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com> CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>...

Hi, Not sure if this is the right place for general questions on BDD style, but here goes... I have a class which behaves almost like a big function - you always instantiate it with a bunch of args, and call one of a couple of methods to get the results back. BDD style seems to like a separate describe block for each instantiation of the class under test. In this case that would mean a

...sshguard that will do the same thing. > One of these should probably be running anyway as they help mitigate issues where someone keep hammering on your system, however in the days of DDOS, they are less helpful than they used to be. I'll take a look at sshguard, although it looks like its retroactive too: it waits for the events to be logged and then bans based on what it finds in the logs. I was intending to do something more proactive, at the dovecot layer, and ideally just silently drop them. Or throw the attempts into a different log perhaps. Just thinking out loud at this point. For the s...

...rship of a value is passed into something, that a value is used for a certain duration but then is no longer used, and so on. With this sort of representation, the optimization turns into fairly straightforward value-forwarding and lifetime manipulations. Dealing with unrelated operations and retroactively attempting to infer relationships, as LLVM IR must, turns it into a fundamentally difficult analysis that often relies on semantic knowledge that isn’t expressed in the IR, so that you’re actually reasoning about what happens under a “well-behaved” frontend. John.

...oup becomes just a group and cannot own anything on a Unix > machine, so my recommendation is to not give the group a gidNumber, > create another group 'Unix Admins' ? give this group a gidNumber and > make this group a member of 'Domain Admins' Does removing the gidNumber retroactively allow it to work? (That is, once I figured out how to reset the ACLs from within Windows.) >>> The recommendation at the moment is to not use either sysvolreset or >>> sysvolcheck. Do everything from windows. >> >> I presume with this? >> >>> https:/...

Wayne, I have a few more concerns about the git repository: 1. It looks like you retroactively removed all generated files from the history. This may inconvenience a user who seeks to an older version of the source code and lacks the magic "configure" to help regenerate the files. You also removed "rsync.1" even from revisions before it became a file generated from &q...

...; > Cc: mst at redhat.com > > Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <lvivier at redhat.com> > > Reviewed-by: Amit Shah <amit at kernel.org> > > Thanks! Thanks, however this has already been merged by Linus. I can't add the tag retroactively, sorry about that. For bugfix patches like that, I think we can reasonably target a turn around of a couple of days, these shouldn't really need to wait weeks for review. > > --- > > > > Notes: > > v3: add a comment about ENOSPC error > > v2: making fi...

...unix standard (don't > remember exactly which, but I studied it when working for Conectiva). First off, it's not "wrong." Many distros established many different standards well before any standardization efforts. Even Linus admits that he based many things off of SunOS 4.1 (retroactively Solaris 1) and Solaris 2, and Solaris uses 2-3. [ Remember, Solaris was the original GNU platform. ] So in that regard, Debian is actually like Solaris in its use of 2-3, instead of Fedora-based 3-5. Secondly, you are referring to Linux Standards Base (LSB). Specifically, Section 8.5 in the Ge...

...ms of this Software with software that is licensed under the GPLv2 (“Combined Software”) and if a court of competent jurisdiction determines that the patent provision (Section 3), the indemnity provision (Section 9) or other Section of the License conflicts with the conditions of the GPLv2, you may retroactively and prospectively choose to deem waived or otherwise exclude such Section(s) of the License, but only in their entirety and only with respect to the Combined Software. >> >> ---- end — >> >> >> Despite the effort required to reach this point, this is only a small shi...

...onvention requires them, and so the Swift lowering will produce result types that don’t have legal interpretations as direct results under the C convention. But we can use a different IR convention if it’s necessary to disambiguate Swift’s desired treatment from the target's normal attempts to retroactively match the C convention. - We sometimes have both direct results and indirect results. It would be nice to take advantage of the sret convention even in the presence of direct results on targets that do use a different (profitable) ABI treatment for it. I don’t know how well-supported this is...

Hi all, I remember at OSCON 2005 there was talk of adding DTrace probes to PHP (in fact, I have a photo of Bryan and Wes working on it!). Did they ever get into the upstream branch, ''cause I don''t recall seeing a --enable-dtrace (or similar) configuration option when I recently built PHP 5.2.1. If not, is there an ETA? TIA, -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB

...ms of this Software with software that is licensed under the GPLv2 (“Combined Software”) and if a court of competent jurisdiction determines that the patent provision (Section 3), the indemnity provision (Section 9) or other Section of the License conflicts with the conditions of the GPLv2, you may retroactively and prospectively choose to deem waived or otherwise exclude such Section(s) of the License, but only in their entirety and only with respect to the Combined Software. ---- end --- The first paragraph is the exact same one proposed in the previous discussion (addressing the compiler / runtime...