search for: unpopular

...iate that you have customer demands but those > demands are very unusual (and, frankly, absurd!) but you > must try to meet them regardless. Very unusual? Absurd? Who the what?! I feel like we are talking about completely different topics. I feel like you have just stated that sex is unpopular and very unusual. I don't see how you can possibly say it is very unusual. Everyone is doing it. You are doing it too. You are doing it and yet you are saying it is absurd. If it is absurd, why are you doing it?! It is an indisputable fact that the majority of software is fully compile...

...on > people's changing availability, but we're currently alternating > between 3am UTC and 4pm UTC on Thursdays, with the next call 3am UTC > on Thursday 16th. Ana Pazos will be hosting this Thursday's call, > hangout/dial-in details to be confirmed. The 3am UTC time seems unpopular, so for the time being we're going to stick with 4pm UTC on a Thursday. Hangouts URL for today's discussion (4pm UTC) is https://hangouts.google.com/hangouts/_/asbradbury.org/riscvllvmdiscussion Best, Alex

This may be an unpopular opinion (and I don’t have the full context on those specific issues), but I believe that these are an abuse of XFAIL, and should probably be written in terms of REQUIRES instead of XFAIL. I believe XFAIL tests actually execute, and are just marked as expected failure. If a test is not expected to...

Dear list, At the RISC-V BoF at the LLVM Dev Meeting and the longer working session the day after, those of us working on RISC-V with LLVM decided it would be worthwhile to schedule regular sync-up calls in order to better co-ordinate ongoing work between different developers. This is primarily to sync-up, share blocking issues and so on. I understand something similar was done during the

...se RTC access pattern triggers Xen''s rtc_mode_no_ack logic. The result is that the domain falls into a tight loop reading RTC RegC, whoes value is always 0xc0. I have confirmed that switching Xen back to RTC strict mode fixes the regression, but I am presuming that this alone would be an unpopular fix upstream. At the moment, HVMloader unconditionally advertises the RTC_NO_ACK bit in the WAET table, and Xen unconditionally decides that the domain has been informed that it should not ack RTC interrupts as per the specification. This logic is broken. There is no guarantee that the domain ha...

> There is a high maintenance cost to having backends in the tree (every > codegen change requires updating all backends). Adding stuff that > noone uses and can barely test is not goodness. So, proposing a backend for an unpopular architecture is not a good idea for GSoC project in general?

Hi all, I've been testing various codecs to eliminate "choppiness" that I sometimes get on my Asterisk IAX2 <> DSL <> provider (Exgn) connections, and Speex seems to work the best, so far - but Speex seems oddly unpopular. Can anyone share their experiences with Speex (good and bad)? Is anyone using it in a production environment? I like the variable bit rate and packet loss concealment features... - Mike

...n: does anyone have experience with that kind of performance problem? Do you think it is a XFS problem or are there some other tuning parameters in the kernel that could be modified for instance via /proc? The reason why I'm asking here is that it is a production file-system so I would be very unpopular if I experiment too much (a couple of reboots is OK ;) ) Bernhard PS: the situation got worse during the last weeks when the file-system increased in size, so the option that some kind of buffer now is too small and I'm experiencing some kind of thrashing seems very likely to me

...edia" clause. I don't know if this has already been answered in the current thread or the previous discussion of an llvm CoC, but: What is the intended resolution of an issue like: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 where, IIUC, someone from the community makes politically incorrect/unpopular statements outside of the community on so-called "external media" (without attacking or harassing anyone in particular), but keeps his/her direct interactions with the community on topic, engineering related, and non-discriminatory? Jon > > --renato > -------------- next part...

...changing availability, but we're currently alternating >> between 3am UTC and 4pm UTC on Thursdays, with the next call 3am UTC >> on Thursday 16th. Ana Pazos will be hosting this Thursday's call, >> hangout/dial-in details to be confirmed. > > The 3am UTC time seems unpopular, so for the time being we're going to > stick with 4pm UTC on a Thursday. > > Hangouts URL for today's discussion (4pm UTC) is > https://hangouts.google.com/hangouts/_/asbradbury.org/riscvllvmdiscussion Just to say this is still ongoing. 4pm UTC tomorrow (Thursday) at the same...

...f wine which has been hacked by IBM to run their 'Homeweaver' software. I tried to cannibalize it's .conf file with no better results..... In addition to the general usefulness of being able to run Windows apps in the event that it is necessary, my immediate goal is to run Outlook. As unpopular as it is, i have searched for an IMAP client on Linux that provides functionality that I like better and am unable.... Lots of good looking POP clients promising to add IMAP support, but.... Is anyone running Outlook on WINE? Are there any special tricks to this that I should know JIC I get my ...

...e. > > The buildbot is based on the latest debian stable (wheezy), which comes with cmake 2.8.9. Is 2.8.9 enough to fix the bug? No. The bug requires 2.8.12.1. I really wanted 3.0, but Chandler requested 2.8.12.2 because it was the version in the latest Ubuntu LTS. I’m going to put on my “unpopular opinion” hat for a second. I don’t think it is reasonable for us to limit our CMake version to the lowest common denominator of all Linux distributions. I really think the Linux developers should just do what I do on OS X and build it from source. Building CMake is really simple and fast. This is...

...patibility list and I tried all of them, sadly to no success. All of them report that the UPS is not connected to mains (or randomly switches between states) and no battery information. I also tried all the "various" listed drivers to no avail either. This specific UPS seems to be rather unpopular as well, I wasn't able to find much info about it or the company in general. Is there anything else I can try or provide? I'd love to help to my best abilities to try and get it to work somehow :) I quickly read through the driver development guide but this is sadly way above my current ski...

...#39;t know if this has already been answered in the current thread or >> the previous discussion of an llvm CoC, but: What is the intended >> resolution of an issue like: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 where, >> IIUC, someone from the community makes politically incorrect/unpopular statements >> outside of the community on so-called "external media" (without attacking >> or harassing anyone in particular), but keeps his/her direct interactions >> with the community on topic, engineering related, and non-discriminatory? >> > > I can'...

...d library that are in > the installed headers but not mentioned in WRE. These would need to > be reviewed and adjusted. Is there a way for outsiders to help? For example, would it help to produce the linking graph (package P links to entry points X, Y)? I understand that an entry point being unpopular doesn't mean it shouldn't be public (and the other way around), but combined with a list of entry points that are listed in WRE, such a graph could be useful to direct effort or estimate impact from interface changes. -- Best regards, Ivan

...t; about compatibility of relocatable objects and not communication of > options; is that users expect to be able to move binary only objects > between projects, and information embedded in object files that isn't > easily accessible to them that causes a link to fail is extremely > unpopular. I'm definitely of the opinion that we should be cautious > with what we allow to be put in. > > Peter > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180108/eb823343/attachment.html>

...ich are used to reason about compatibility of relocatable objects and not communication of options; is that users expect to be able to move binary only objects between projects, and information embedded in object files that isn't easily accessible to them that causes a link to fail is extremely unpopular. I'm definitely of the opinion that we should be cautious with what we allow to be put in. Peter

Hi klibc people, if someone has to say more on this, please do so. I?m only trying to explain what I _think_ I learned? >Begin forwarded message originally by Mike Frysinger: >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote: >>> unfortunately the common vfork implementation, which just use >>> the syscall function to interact with the kernel, does not

...on the latest debian stable (wheezy), which comes with cmake 2.8.9. Is 2.8.9 enough to fix the bug? >> >> No. The bug requires 2.8.12.1. I really wanted 3.0, but Chandler requested 2.8.12.2 because it was the version in the latest Ubuntu LTS. >> >> I’m going to put on my “unpopular opinion” hat for a second. I don’t think it is reasonable for us to limit our CMake version to the lowest common denominator of all Linux distributions. I really think the Linux developers should just do what I do on OS X and build it from source. Building CMake is really simple and fast. >>...

Hi, I intend to participate in Google's Summer of Code this year, so I'd like to bounce another idea around to see what you guys think. (I posted a similar message to cfe-dev just now.) Be warned: this will shock you. It may even horrify you. 1. Implement a 16-bit x86 backend. (*Chris recoils in horror*) Yeah, I know 16-bit x86 is dead, but I find it interesting for historical purposes