search for: worry

Red Hat AS 3 Samba 3.0.0 (from distro) openldap-2.0.27-11 smbldap-tools-0.8.2-1 nss_ldap-207-5 PDC and LDAP Master / BDC and LDAP slave errors in client logs - should I worry? something I can fix? client log A - Worry? Don't Worry? [2004/01/29 08:08:59, 0] groupdb/mapping.c:init_group_mapping(139) Failed to open group mapping database [2004/01/29 08:08:59, 0] groupdb/mapping.c:get_domain_group_from_sid(509) client log B - Worry? Don't Worry? [2004/01/29 10:4...

...support. After using grep, it seems like the only thing besides the JIT is the interpreter. Linking all the llvm tools with pthreads would be overkill, but it certainly won't hurt too much, except wasting a bit of virtual memory. At any rate, I've got a hack now that works, and I'll worry about the exact details a bit later (or maybe let someone else worry about the exact details later?). > In particular, I don't know the appropriate way to autoconf this, > though I'm sure there is some standard way to do it. Right. I've found a couple of pthreads autoconf mac...

...ings up regarding winbind. wbinfo -u returns "Error looking up domain users". I'm only using winbind for ntlm_auth which works fine. I'm not using AD or any Windows server-based domain. Samba only. There don't seem to be any obvious errors in the winbind log. Do I need to worry about that error? Should it list my full user list? I've recently upgraded to 3.0.26a from 3.0.14 and noticed Samba has added a couple of extra groups on my LDAP server: sambaSID=S-1-5-32-544 and sambaSID=S-1-5-32-545. One has displayName:Administrators and one has displayName:Users. These...

Hi all, Currently in the llvm middle-end, we disable some optimizations because we worry about the register pressure, (e.g. GVNHoist and ArgumentPromotion). However, in the architecture that are register-rich, e.g. FPGAs, we do not need to worry about the register pressure at all. For these architecures, we may want to optimization the LLVM IR without worrying about the register press...

...ll, I checked out everything mentioned in GettingStarted at tags/RELEASE_370/final and ran `make -j4 check-all`. I got three test failures: libc++abi :: catch_array_01.pass.cpp libc++abi :: catch_function_01.pass.cpp libc++abi :: catch_member_function_pointer_01.pass.cpp Should I worry? Here are the failures as reported, with the LLVM source directory replaced with ... for clarity: catch_array_01.pass.cpp.exe: .../projects/libcxxabi/test/catch_array_01.pass.cpp:25: int main(): Assertion `false' failed. catch_function_01.pass.cpp.exe: .../projects/libcxxabi/test/catch_f...

Hello, I have a question about ext3 write activity. I am considering using an ext3 fs on a CompactFlash disk for my data-logging application (power can disapear anytime). The quantity & frequency of the data logged itself is not a problem at all considering flash wear. But I'm a bit worried about the kernel/ext3 doing regular writes by itself even when there are no userspace writes.

I see the comment here about some 64bit combinations failing. Well, my configuration fails. Is this really something to worry about? for R-patched: fi1->cat SVN-REVISION Revision: 39576 Last Changed Date: 2006-10-03 fi1-> > ## failed for some 64bit-Lapack-gcc combinations: > sm <- cbind(1, 3:1, 1:3) > eigenok(sm, eigen(sm)) Error: abs(A %*% V - V %*% diag(lam)) < Eps is not all TRUE > eigenok(s...

...ent "constant" values... or so we think.] > > > I'm fine with using constant buffers for the input, it is not the > mechanism I'm worried about it is the tgsi syntax to express things, > I think it would be beneficial for the tgsi syntax to be abstract, and > not worry about the underlying mechanism, this will i.e. allow us > to use shared memory for input on tesla and const bufs on later generations > without the part generating the tgsi code needing to worry about this. Yeah, I think you're right. I didn't realize that tesla had a special form of...

...ISDN card (fcpci/chan_capi) Four Grandstream BudgeTone 101 handsets It's a shared 100bT LAN with three PCs and a printer, no strenuous file copying etc. Network utilisation is very low. All the kit have 'real' IP addresses. Has anybody got any ideas what could possibly be causing this worrying problem? Cheers, Nick Barnes

...k.] >>> >>> >>> I'm fine with using constant buffers for the input, it is not the >>> mechanism I'm worried about it is the tgsi syntax to express things, >>> I think it would be beneficial for the tgsi syntax to be abstract, and >>> not worry about the underlying mechanism, this will i.e. allow us >>> to use shared memory for input on tesla and const bufs on later generations >>> without the part generating the tgsi code needing to worry about this. >> >> Yeah, I think you're right. I didn't realize...

OEL 5, OCFS 1.4, using EMC Power Path for multi pathing. I want t mount the OCFS2 file system on the emc power path device. I can mount by UUID, and not have to worry about persistent bindings across nodes. But how do I make sure when it mounts by UUID , that the pwoer path device is used. Any help will be much appreciated. Thanks -- Sridhar Avantsa savantsa at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://...

Hate to ask, but after reading the last few months of centos history online I am worried. And to learn the lead guy seems to have absconded with the cash and left all the hard working devs high and dry..well that is scary. They all worked so hard and who knows what will happen now. If centos falls I have no choice but to go to redhat. I am wondering if the conversion will be easy or a complete

..., and fully sublicensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, and display such content throughout the world in any media. The wiki is a great resource and I'm very grateful that the infrastructure for it has been provided, but I worry about these terms. Would anyone linked to the wiki care to comment on the reason for them? A creative commons license would still allow you to publish a book based on the submissions, if that is the intent. What worries me most is that the current terms seem crafted so as to ensure that should th...

Hi, I have a question: do I have to worry if I run with wine an executable that may contain a virus (I am running linux as a normal user, not root)? -- Peter Kostov, webdesigner, photographer Sofia, Bulgaria Home sites - www.webdesign.light-bg.com - www.light-bg.com

Hi, I'm new in LLVM project , I have to write a compiler frond-end (based on LLVM) in C++ to support my programming language .Am I have to implement support for each architecture or LLVM has libraries that can do this for me ? (btw I don't want to support architecture that LLVM don't) . does LLVM has helper functions to create objects in heap ? if not is it good idea to use C++11

...ople have out there that provide snippets of HTML that could be user provided? I saw something in AWDWR about sanitize() - any comments/advice on that? One thing I''m considering is rendering it on the server side and providing an image of the rendered to the user - then I only have to worry about being compromised on my server instead of worrying about XSS attacks. Does that make sense? Any thoughts or advice is appreciated. Wes -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

...59247 -> ffff82c4802170e4 (XEN) traps.c:3156: GPF (0060): ffff82c480159247 -> ffff82c4802170e4 (XEN) traps.c:3156: GPF (0060): ffff82c480159247 -> ffff82c4802170e4 (XEN) traps.c:3156: GPF (0060): ffff82c480159247 -> ffff82c4802170e4 What does that mean and is it something that I should worry about? -- Valtteri Kiviniemi _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Patches item #4603, was opened at 2006-05-29 16:07 You can respond by visiting: http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=413&aid=4603&group_id=85 Category: win32-open3 Group: Bug Fix Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 3 Submitted By: John-Mason Shackelford (jpshackelford) Assigned to: Nobody (None) Summary: [open3] set $? and return Process::Status with block call Initial

...And thus, I don't think I need to change anything, Boehm's GC should be able to find roots in those functions when they are on the stack just as well as any C/C++ function. Am I mistaken about this? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/LLVM-JIT-%2B-Boehm%27s-GC%2C-Need-I-Worry--tp22439304p22439304.html Sent from the LLVM - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.