search for: tantamount

...uot; means *it works* - this is a very standard term. You can find all relevant on the following link: http://goo.gl/Gm4ffO ISOLINUX so you can yourself further analyzed it. There is a bootable/isolinux-6.04 image: Rawhide-Live-Xfce-702-604-boot-only.iso, with the "boot-enable" patch - tantamount to: --- a/com32/menu/readconfig.c +++ b/com32/menu/readconfig.c @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ char c; while ((c = *src++)) { - if (c <= ' ' || c == '\x7f') { + if (c <= ' ' && c == '\x7f') { ... And that's it. ;) I thank you for your participa...

...mulate a good statement of what transforms would necessarily have to be forbidden, I think we should get to a sound state first, and then work on more aggressive models to use. I think that coming up with something that is really sound is going to be incredibly hard here because I think it will be tantamount to removing the concept of undef entirely and the entire optimizer's reliance on it. And most of the obvious ideas to replace it I think will have the same challenges as undef. We're also, meanwhile, going to have to dramatically curtail our investigation of more exciting IPO opportunities...

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1812887,00.asp Specifically, his assertion that ISP's would sniff traffic and block, say, the SIP port. You could play wack-a-mole with port numbers, no? Also a community based, Freenet style of encryption implementation for "free" VoIP traffic would address this issue. I raise this to the list because I'm sure there's a grain of

...id for OpenCL private or constant address > spaces, it’s just global or local where this would be a problem. Unless I've misunderstood (which is a possibility, I've not invested proper time thinking about this, which I'll do if you indicate I'm missing something), this would be tantamount to tying certain address to specific rules regarding potential data races in the memory model. I'm not very comfortable with that. Perhaps you're instead trying to say that with certain address spaces "noalias" (and by inference, "restrict" at the language level) has a d...

...ctory there As you see, I am NOT working under the root shell. However, for some reason the wine process, which was installed at the root -and from what I read there is no other way- decides that it is not allowed to write into my Home Directory. Of course I could sudo evrything, but this would be tantamount to running wine in root, wouldn't it? And I fully agree with the rule which forbids that. Install: I tried two ways, first the way I had installed it on Snow Leopard, http://www.davidbaumgold.com/tutorials/wine-mac/ with the special PATH commands after MacPorts then a more streamlined way...

...It'd be nice to see the size of the ISO (73M) prior to downloading. > so you can yourself further analyzed it. Again, it feels like details are lost. > There is a bootable/isolinux-6.04 image: > Rawhide-Live-Xfce-702-604-boot-only.iso, > with the "boot-enable" patch - tantamount to: > > --- a/com32/menu/readconfig.c > +++ b/com32/menu/readconfig.c > @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ > char c; > > while ((c = *src++)) { > - if (c <= ' ' || c == '\x7f') { > + if (c <= ' ' && c == '\x7f') { >...

Dear All, Suppose that you are trying to create a binary logistic model by trying different combinations of predictors. Has R got an automatic way of doing this, i.e., is there some way of automatically generating different tentative models and checking their corresponding AIC value? If so, could you please direct me to an example? Thanks in advance, Paul

Hi All This is a general stats problem that I am dealing with using R, so any help is greater appreciated. I have two lognormal distributions with means M1 and M2. If we have: H0: log(M1/M2)=0 H1: log(M1/M2) !=0 equivalent to log(M1/M2)=log(1+P) where P<0 or P>0. If we calculate the power for a value of P=0.1 or P=-0.1 (i.e. a 10% difference) and say assume SE{log(M1/M2)}=0.05, and

...uctive, and the examples being discussed are helping to frame what such a statement might contain. We should exhaust this line of reasoning before making a decision. > I think that coming up with something that is really sound is going > to be incredibly hard here because I think it will be tantamount to > removing the concept of undef entirely and the entire optimizer's > reliance on it. And most of the obvious ideas to replace it I think > will have the same challenges as undef. I'll await an example here that does not rely on a safe-to-speculate attribute that we don't ye...

On Nov 8, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Owen Anderson <resistor at mac.com> wrote: > Hi Matt, > > On Nov 8, 2013, at 1:14 PM, Matt Arsenault <Matthew.Arsenault at amd.com> wrote: > >> Both of these I think sort of went in the wrong direction and talked specifically about the semantics of the atomic instructions (fence in particular), which isn't the real question. Is

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at google.com> > To: "Sanjoy Das" <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com>, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com>, "Duncan P. N. Exon Smith" >

Dear all, I have a serious problem to solve my model. I study over exploitation of fish in the bay of biscay (france). I know only the level of catch and the fishing effort (see data below) by year. My model is composed by the following equations: * the growth function Gt(St) = r*St*(1-St/sbar) with Gt the growth of each period t r intrinsec growth of the stock sbar carriyng capacity of the

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 10:25 PM Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > Hal Finkel wrote: > > > But it is not all optimizations that are the problem. Rather, it > > seems like a select few (e.g. things involving collapsing allowed > > non-determinism in atomics), and losing those optimizations seems > > better than generally losing

Colin wrote: A lot of good sensible stuff. Well done Colin. Bill Seddon Lyquidity Solutions Limited -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Colin Anderson Sent: February 23, 2005 3:54 PM To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion' Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] List tips for

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, 0:27 Laine Stump, <laine@redhat.com> wrote: > (Adding Alex Williamson to Cc so he can correct any mistakes) > > On 8/22/19 4:39 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 12:01 PM Laine Stump <laine@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 8/22/19 10:56 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > >>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 2:24 AM

On 01.07.2015 12:10, Gene Cumm wrote: > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:35 AM, poma <pomidorabelisima at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> To remind you once again. >> ISOLINUX >= 6.00 built with GCC >= 5.0.0 causes a broken boot. >> This relates specifically to the use of the vesamenu.c32, >> menu.c32 works without problemos. > > isolinux-debug.bin is not for

Not sure if it''s been posted yet, my email is currently down... http://weblog.infoworld.com/yager/archives/2007/10/suns_zfs_is_clo.html Interesting piece. This is the second post from Yager that shows solaris in a pretty good light. I particularly like his closing comment: "If you haven''t checked out ZFS yet, do, because it will eventually become ubiquitously implemented