search for: violate

violating.runs I read from the news cran.r-project.org/doc/Rnews/Rnews_2004-1.pdf that the criteria for the violating is 5 but 1)I cannot find "5" in the code of the function. Where is the "5" ? 2)What is the easiest way to change it ? 3)Is there any more criterias made somewhere ? Yours sincerelly, Tommi Viitanen

Hello, i heve a Suse 10.3 System and wine-1.1.34-3.1.i586. starts FTPRush show the FTPlog Errors Code: [i] FE: Access violation at address 7EB19997 in module 'winex11.drv'. Read of address 00000000 [i] FE: Access violation at address 7EB19997 in module 'winex11.drv'. Read of address 00000000 [i] FE: Access violation at address 7EB19997 in module 'winex11.drv'. Read of

Package: logcheck-database Version: 1.3.5 Severity: normal Hi, I was having a look at logcheck and why I received a "verification failed: Temporary failure in name resolution" as a _system_ message. Turns out that since violations.d/logcheck is empty now, most of the rules in violations.ignore.d look quite useless, can you confirm? I suspect that a big part of those rules should be

After upgrading to centos 5.4 I am getting a selinux violation, yet nothing is logged to /var/log/audit/audit.log. Other violations do get logged. The violation occurs when running the following command on the mail server: aspen> /usr/bin/Mail centos at centos.org Subject: test hi Cc: aspen> send-mail: warning: premature end-of-input on /usr/sbin/postdrop -r while reading input

Just some clarification here. On Monday, June 30, 2003 12:04 AM, Steven Critchfield [SMTP:critch@basesys.com] wrote: > > As for slips and bipolar violations... > T1s are just high speed serial lines. A sleep is when you loose sync > with the far side and when you see a 1 come across the line, you may > not > know which bit it was for. A slip is when one end of the circuit is

Hi guys, now that violations.d/logcheck is empty, violations.ignore.d/logcheck-* are useless and many messages that were previously elevated and filtered there now turn up as system events. Thus, I went ahead and merged violations.ignore.d/logcheck-* into ignore.d.*/* in the viol-merge branch. http://git.debian.org/?p=logcheck/logcheck.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/viol-merge Unless I hear

...Ns on CN=PCNAME,CN=Computers,DC=DOMAIN,DC=NAME,DC=NAME,DC=de: error in module acl: Constraint violation during LDB_MODIFY (19) In the net i found this "explanation": "LDAP_CONSTRAINT_VIOLATION Indicates that the attribute value specified in a modify, add, or modify DN operation violates constraints placed on the attribute. The constraint can be one of size or content (string only, no binary)." Hm, is this triggerd by dns-updates? I see this only with two clients How can I "debug" this ? I am using samba 4.3.4 with bind-dlz clients are win7 Thank you for your t...

Hi, I'm seeing this error on 3.0.24, 3.0.28, 3.0.32 and 3.2.6: Failed to join domain: failed to set machine spn: Constraint violation [Sanitised] First Run: net ads join createupn=HOST/FQDN@DOM.REALM.DOMAIN.COM createcomputer="OU/OU/OU/Services" -U username -d1 Enter username's password: [2008/12/11 17:02:32, 1] libnet/libnet_join.c:libnet_Join(1770) libnet_Join:

Ein eingebundener Text mit undefiniertem Zeichensatz wurde abgetrennt. Name: nicht verf?gbar URL: <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/attachments/20130304/62581e97/attachment.pl>

...es it in tangible form, the creator is the copyright holder and has the authority to enforce his exclusivity to it. In other words, the person is the owner of the creation. It is not necessary that a person register their work. However, it is recommended and it can serve as evidence if someone ever violates a copyright. It is interesting to note that when an employer hires an employee to produce a work that the copyright is given to the employer. Violations of US Copyright Law are generally enforced in a civil court setting. However, there could also be criminal sanctions brought against someone who...

Package: logcheck Version: 1.2.32 Severity: normal It seems when someone runs a sudo command on my system, logcheck misses it. The second line of /etc/logcheck/violations.d/sudo matches them, but the /etc/logcheck/violations.ignore.d/logcheck-sudo kills them. Furthermore, when users run commands like '$ sudo rm *' in a directory with lots of files, we reports with lines like: Jan 13

Package: logcheck-database Version: 1.2.63 Severity: normal Given that violations.d/logcheck has been emptied by 2394562ab4a13c4510c671f01ffc8f35e97f1cd3, shouldn't most of violations.ignore.d be moved to one of ignore.d.*? AIUI, all of these are currently rendered useless. (I'll gladly lend a hand; I just want to make sure this is the right thing to do.) -- System Information: Debian

Content violation found in email message. From: samba@lists.samba.org To: serg@aesltd.com.au Subject: hi Matching Subject: hi

Gentlemen, I have searched the group and have not found any post that clarifies thsi s=issue to me. Please forgive me in advance if I missed something. I have 3 models: Ticket has_many :citations, :dependent => :nullify has_many :violations, :through => :citations Violation has_many :citations, :dependent => :nullify has_many :tickets, :through => :citations Citation

Hello, I am using Windows 7 and R version 2.13.1. I was trying to read a csv file which has about 1.5 million records and 13 variables. My R code loaded 145,346 records only without showing any error. If I want to see the last few records (tail), it is throwing access violation error. I am attaching the screenshot showing this error and the code I am running to read this file. While running

Package: logcheck-database Version: 1.2.39 Severity: wishlist Hi, I'd like to add the following rule to /etc/logcheck/violations.ignore.d/logcheck-postfix : ^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ postfix/smtpd?\[[0-9]+\]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from [._[:alnum:]-]+\[[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\]: 554 <[._[:alnum:]-]+\[[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\]>:

If I do something similar to the below ov_open always causes an access violation. The call to fopen is successful. Can anybody tell me why? (and how to fix it?) OggVorbis_File vf; int eof=0; int current_section; FILE *fd = fopen("c:\\test.ogg","rb"); if (!fd){ AfxTrace("fopen failed\n"); exit(0); } if(ov_open(fd, &vf, NULL, 0) < 0) {

...> > Yes, I think it makes sense. I don't we should do that. Take the `gep inbounds` example: char* foo(char *arg) { return `gep inbounds %arg, -100` } Here it depends if we want to deduce the output is dereferenceable(100) or not. If we do, we need dereferenceable to mean poison if violated, as with nonnull, because it is derived from poison. Only if we don't derive dereferenceable for the return value we can go for dereferenceable violations are UB. In the end, I think, it boils down to the question if there are situations where violation of some attributes should be poison and...

Hi All, I updated the copyright section of the developer policy: http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright This change doesn't affect any llvm policies, it just makes the developer policy reflect reality. The previous version (archived here: http://llvm.org/releases/2.7/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright) used to claim that all copyright was assigned to the university of

...ERRINE-WHITE,OU=Terminal Servers,DC=example,DC=com: error in module acl: Constraint violation (19) > In the net i found this "explanation": > > "LDAP_CONSTRAINT_VIOLATION > Indicates that the attribute value specified in a modify, add, or > modify DN > operation violates constraints placed on the attribute. The > constraint can be > one of size or content (string only, no binary)." > > Hm, is this triggerd by dns-updates? > I see this only with two clients > How can I "debug" this ? > > I am using samba 4.3.4 with bind-dl...