search for: wied

Thanks a lot for your help so far. The main reason I do not use vms is that the server is pretty limited in RAM so this would only be my last resort. To prevent confusion: srv.wie (192.168.1.50) is the same machine as smb.wie (192.168.1.55), I seperated them just now to debug the problem. > These look like they are being run on the DC, what about from the > windows clients ? > I did

> > This sounds like a dns problem, are your windows machines using the DC > as their nameserver ? > yes they are using the server as dns. DNS is done through bind9 and implemented in samba via bind9_dlz. All looks fine: $ host -t A smb.wie smb.wie has address 192.168.1.50 $ host -t SRV _kerberos._udp.smb.wie _kerberos._udp.smb.wie has SRV record 0 100 88 srv.smb.wie. $ host -t SRV

On Sun, 6 Nov 2016 16:20:32 +0100 Maximilian Kirchner via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Thanks a lot for your help so far. The main reason I do not use vms > is that the server is pretty limited in RAM so this would only be my > last resort. To prevent confusion: srv.wie (192.168.1.50) is the same > machine as smb.wie (192.168.1.55), I seperated them just now to

Thanks for the reply Rowland (and sorry for replying twice). I actually used the wiki you linked to setup the dc. I just added those idmap settings because getent could not list my samba users after setting it up, due to your mail I realised I only needed the winbind options to make it work. The original problem still remains though, using \\SMB.WIE I can only access netlogon and sysvol, using

On Sun, 6 Nov 2016 15:05:39 +0100 Maximilian Kirchner via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > This sounds like a dns problem, are your windows machines using the > > DC as their nameserver ? > > > > yes they are using the server as dns. DNS is done through bind9 and > implemented in samba via bind9_dlz. All looks fine: > $ host -t A smb.wie

for example I want to insert a new machine bb “before” a specific machine bb. or split a mbb and keep the later one as the original one. (to keep the label/Blackadder's correct t) (or keep other property of mbb) so I need to transfer the original mbb's predecessor to the new mbb. Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle at gmail.com> 於 2020年3月13日 週五 23:57 寫道： > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at

Hallo, zur Analyse von Daten zum Artenreichtum von Pflanzen, habe ich ein Glm (glm) und anschlie?end eine Anova (anova) durchgef??hrt. Nun m??chte ich f??r die signifikanten Einflussfaktoren einen Post Hoc Tukey Test durchf??hren, um zu ermitteln in wie weit die einzelnen Faktorstufen sich signifikant voneinander unterscheiden. Mit dem Befehl (TukeyHSD) komme ich nicht

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 7:00 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > I don't have much personal interest here - but my understanding was > that there was/is a fair bit of pushback to fragmenting the > communications channels to discord before there's a more general > buy-in to switch over across the project? (perhaps I'm misremembering > the previous

Conditional on the target supporting cmov? Though that's probably not optimal. On Wed, Feb 5, 2020, 7:47 AM Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Ryan, > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 7:08 PM Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > SimplifyCFG FoldTwoEntryPhiNode looks to simplify all 2 entry phi nodes > in a block, if it

On 22.08.2018 17:52, Ryan Taylor wrote: > This is probably going to effect on other backends and break llvm-lit > for them? Very likely, yes. Can you take a look at how big the fallout is? This might give us a hint about what other frontends might expect, and who needs to be involved in the discussion (if one is needed). Cheers, Nicolai > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 11:41 AM

On 22.08.2018 13:29, Ryan Taylor wrote: > The example starts as SPIR-V with the NoContraction decoration flag on > the fmul. > > I think what you are saying seems valid in that if the user had put the > flag on the fadd instead of the fmul it would not contract and so in > this example the user needs to put the NoContraction on the fadd though > I'm not sure

Any comments at all on this? Chandler perhaps? I've since dug a bit further, and it seems like the template-based solution wouldn't work anyway because DLL loading on Windows can't do the required commoning. So the general approach taken in https://reviews.llvm.org/D62802 seems to be the only technically viable path forward, though it would still be good to get an outside look at the

Hi all, We’ve been having discussions over the last few weeks with stakeholders both inside and outside of AMD about where we could best have a dedicated and open discussion space for topics around the AMDGPU target. The conclusion was that we’d like to try the use of a category in the LLVM Discourse group, which is mostly used for MLIR discussion so far. I have started a Discourse topic with

I set up a samba ad dc (self compiled samba 4.5.1 on Ubuntu 16.04). If I connect to the server via \\smb.wie (its dns name) I can access netlogon and sysvol. If I connect via its IP then I can access all my shares (test as an example) - but either way I cannot connect to the other (I do see them though). Windows always tells me the login credentials would be wrong for the other one. This is my

> > You are using Bind9 with flatfiles, this is NOT recommended. > If you are using the standard Ubuntu Bind9 package, you should be using > BIND9_DLZ and this stores the dns info in AD. > How did you provision the DC, was it with 'BIND9_FLATFILE' or > 'BIND9_DLZ' ? > If it was the later, just remove the 'wie' zone and its reverse zone > from the

Hallo Liste Derzeit mache ich meine ersten Gehversuche mit Linux (SuSE). Bis jetzt habe ich in einem kleinen Netzwerk f?r meine Tauchschule vier Rechner betreut. Einer davon war WinNT-4.0 Server und Arbeitsplatz zugleich. Nachdem ich nicht mehr bereit bin, mich mit dem w?chentlichen "blue screen" und dem monatlichen Neuinstallieren von NT abzufinden, bin ich derzeit beim Umsteigen auf

On 21.08.2018 16:08, Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev wrote: > So I have a test case where: > > %20 = fmul nnan arcp float %15, %19 > %21 = fadd reassoc nnan arcp contract float %20, -1.000000e+00 > > is being contracted in DAG to fmad. Is this correct since the fmul has > no reassoc or contract fast math flag? By having the reassoc and contract flags on fadd, the frontend is

Hai - kann mir jemand sagen, wie ich den Modalwert in R berechne?! IRgendwie finde ich den Befehl nicht.... greetz und herzlichen Dank Sonja

Hello, what I want to do, is, to write every element of a variable into a separate text-file automatically: My Variable: > wull [1] "Hallo Leute, wie gehts denn euch seid ihr noch alle..." [2] "Is their anyone how can help me with..." [3] "mann, mann, mann... das nervt aber.." [4] "how are you littele strange tiger..."

Hi Craig, The review for the similar GPU problem is now up here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85603 (+ some other patches on the Phabricator stack). >From a pragmatic perspective, the constraints added to program transforms there are sufficient for what you need. You'd produce IR such as: %token = call token @llvm.experimental.convergence.anchor() br i1 %c, label %then, label %else