search for: revisioning

Now that I have most everything actually working I've noticed that about every 3-4 days on average..... and at worse... Once a day my asterisk box seems to lose it's registered state with our sip provider and no longer will take any incoming calls. The caller simply hears a fast busy (reorder) If I do a reload at the command prompt all is well for another few days..... What I'm

Add support for non-integer revisions of entries, comparing them as integer when possible. --- builder/builder.ml | 9 ++++++++- builder/cache.ml | 2 +- builder/cache.mli | 6 +++--- builder/downloader.mli | 2 +- builder/index.ml | 4 ++-- builder/index.mli | 2 +- builder/index_parser.ml | 4 ++-- builder/utils.ml | 7 +++++++ 8 files changed, 25

I'm going to try and ask this again and keep it short and as too the point as I can while still providing enough info to be of use. PLEASE advise if I am going about this wrong or asking too much. I'm seriously doing my BEST to throughly read the docs and try a bunch of things BEFORE coming here to ask and possibly annoy. If is documentation that explains thsi process in terms that

This is the patch to include SVN revision level in version number displays. There should be two enclosures; the patch itself and a new source file. common/upsversion.c. upversion.c defines a single function. upsversion(), that returns a version string for display. Some Makefile trickery ensures that this file will be recompiled whenever the project's SVN revision level has changed since it

On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 02:00:18PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > From: Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Handle the virtio-ccw revision according to what the guest sets. > When revision 1 is selected, we have a virtio-1 standard device > with byteswapping for the virtio rings. > > When a channel gets disabled, we have to revert to the legacy behavior >

On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 02:00:18PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > From: Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Handle the virtio-ccw revision according to what the guest sets. > When revision 1 is selected, we have a virtio-1 standard device > with byteswapping for the virtio rings. > > When a channel gets disabled, we have to revert to the legacy behavior >

On 2009-05-18 20:06, Frits van Bommel wrote: > Xerxes Rånby wrote: > >> Frits van Bommel skrev: >> >>> Benjamin Kramer wrote: >>> >>>> The attached patch modifies the llvm build system (both autotools and >>>> cmake) to write the revision into PACKAGE_VERSION: >>>> >>>> $ llvm-config --version

Török Edwin wrote: > I think you don't need to support all trunk revisions. > People using trunk could be told to either update to a certain revision, > or stick to a released version. We don't support /all/ trunk revisions, but we don't like to force upgrades unless it's really needed so we try to at least support most recent revisions. One of the reasons is that not

I can''t get my plain text stories to show pending actions like the example addition plain text story. Any tips? (See below) http://pastie.caboo.se/119627 Nathan Sutton fowlduck at gmail.com rspec edge revision 2910 rspec_on_rails edge revision 2909 rails edge revision 8167

I'm one of the developers of Notmuch, an email client that makes extensive use of Xapian. For some time, full multi-version concurrency control (MVCC) has been on our wish list. Olly mentioned that brass now uses free lists---a key step toward full MVCC---and I offered to pitch in on putting the other pieces into place. Before I wade too deep into this, I wanted to propose my plan. Full

Hi, I would like to propose adding the following new fields/flags to bugzilla. My goal is to make it easier to manage bug fixes and merges using automated scripts. - "Trunk Revision(s)" field This would give users a place to enter which revision(s) in trunk fixed a particular bug. This would make it easy to generate a list of bugs fixed by each release which could be included in the

From: Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> With the new SET-VIRTIO-REVISION command of the virtio 1.0 standard, we can now negotiate the virtio-ccw revision after setting a channel online. Note that we don't negotiate version 1 yet. [Cornelia Huck: reworked revision loop a bit] Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <dahi at linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 02:25:20PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > Devices may support different sets of feature bits depending on which > revision they're operating at. Let's give the transport a way to > re-query the device about its features when the revision has been > changed. > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck at de.ibm.com> So now we have both

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 02:25:20PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > Devices may support different sets of feature bits depending on which > revision they're operating at. Let's give the transport a way to > re-query the device about its features when the revision has been > changed. > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck at de.ibm.com> So now we have both

Hi! There are a lot of accepted but not closed revisions in Differential. Many of them were actually committed, but without Differential revision link or when it was specified in wrong way. I think will be good idea to create script which will match committed revisions with those in Differential: file list should be same and hashes of changed line could be calculated for each file. In case of

From: Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> Handle the virtio-ccw revision according to what the guest sets. When revision 1 is selected, we have a virtio-1 standard device with byteswapping for the virtio rings. When a channel gets disabled, we have to revert to the legacy behavior in case the next user of the device does not negotiate the revision 1 anymore (e.g. the boot firmware

From: Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> Handle the virtio-ccw revision according to what the guest sets. When revision 1 is selected, we have a virtio-1 standard device with byteswapping for the virtio rings. When a channel gets disabled, we have to revert to the legacy behavior in case the next user of the device does not negotiate the revision 1 anymore (e.g. the boot firmware

From: Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> Handle the virtio-ccw revision according to what the guest sets. When revision 1 is selected, we have a virtio-1 standard device with byteswapping for the virtio rings. When a channel gets disabled, we have to revert to the legacy behavior in case the next user of the device does not negotiate the revision 1 anymore (e.g. the boot firmware

From: Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> Handle the virtio-ccw revision according to what the guest sets. When revision 1 is selected, we have a virtio-1 standard device with byteswapping for the virtio rings. When a channel gets disabled, we have to revert to the legacy behavior in case the next user of the device does not negotiate the revision 1 anymore (e.g. the boot firmware

Is it a bad practice to use a subversion repository to the trunk of rspec and rspec_on_rails? Or rather, is it doomed to fail, since my gem will always be out of date? I know I can''t use spec, installed from gem,s if I have the latest revision of rspec and rspec_on_rails checked into my plugins directory. But I should still be able to use it with the --drb option, correct?