search for: targetattrs

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "targetattrs".

Did you mean: target_attrs
2010 Dec 06
1
Centos DS and user password change
[stas at ds ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release CentOS release 5.5 (Final) [stas at ds ~]$ rpm -qa | grep centos-ds centos-ds-admin-8.1.0-9.el5.centos.1 centos-ds-8.1.0-1.el5.centos.2 centos-ds-base-8.1.0-0.14.el5.centos.2 centos-ds-console-8.1.0-5.el5.centos.2 ds installed for: 1) linux workstations authentication 2) mail (accounts & aliases) 3) samba 4) squid acls Exists several r/o replicas.
2013 Jan 11
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Overhauling Attributes
...like to add something to atttributes.h, attributes.cpp in the interim until your full scheme is available. A new attribute called "target" would be added to AttrKind. And target can take a list of strings. target("foo", "goo") For example. I would add a component targetAttrs to AttrBuilder Will this meet with resistance if I try and put this back? Reed On 01/01/2013 04:07 AM, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Dec 31, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > >> Hi Bill, >> >> On 30/12/12 03:21, Bill Wendling wrote: >>&...
2013 Jan 11
1
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Overhauling Attributes
...s.cpp in the > interim until your full scheme is available. > > A new attribute called "target" would be added to AttrKind. > > And target can take a list of strings. > > target("foo", "goo") > > For example. > > I would add a component targetAttrs to AttrBuilder > > Will this meet with resistance if I try and put this back? > > Reed > > On 01/01/2013 04:07 AM, Bill Wendling wrote: >> On Dec 31, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: >> >>> Hi Bill, >>> >>> On...
2013 Jan 01
3
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Overhauling Attributes
On Dec 31, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Bill, > > On 30/12/12 03:21, Bill Wendling wrote: >> Hi Rafael, >> >> Sorry, I forgot to respond to this. They can be arbitrary strings that are known only to the specific back-end. It may be beneficial to define them inside of the LangRef document though. > > this sounds so much