search for: writeaccess

Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "writeaccess".

Did you mean: write_access
2005 Dec 02
1
Cannot read strange filenames
...arset with EURO Sign but no success. Then i tried the cifs instead of smbfs. But the same effect. Switching to UTF-8 doesn't work too. Example: -------- The "wint<EUROSIGN>uro.txt" file was created on a WindowsXP Workstation. All other files are created from the Linuxbox with writeaccess to the WindowsXP PC. mount -t cifs //192.168.9.115/Xchange /mnt/test -o codepage=cp850,iocharset=iso8859-15,unixcharset=iso8859-15 [root@foobar ]# ls -lah /mnt/test/EURO insgesamt 2,5K drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2005-12-01 16:30 . drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2005-12-01 14:26 .. -rwxrwSrwt 1 roo...
2003 Jan 17
0
File access rights and usernames from Windows XP client
Hi, I have recently set up a small network containing a Debian Samba 2.2.3a-12 server and Windows XP pro and Windows ME clients. The Linux box acts as a domain master, and this seemingly works flawless with XP. However, I'm having trouble getting writeaccess and translating the usernames on the XP client to the corresponding ones on the Linux box. What I'd like to accomplish is this: 1) on share A, I'd like the XP client (geddeth) to gain full R/W access, using the share as root 2) on shares B-D, I'd like the XP client to gain full R/W...
2013 Oct 19
3
Suggestions for an "official" place to store permissions/options for a package?
R-developers: Duncan Murdoch suggested I move a post I started on r-help over here, since it is more at the developer level. Here is my question/challenge -- to my knowledge, there is not currently an official way to store a *package*'s options to a standardized location on a user's computer. Given that OS-level programs have standard preference locations, I was hoping to first assess:
2013 Jan 02
0
[LLVMdev] [DragonEgg] [Polly] Should we expect DragonEgg to produce identical LLVM IR for identical GIMPLE?
...] : o0 >= 47246749696 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 and o0 <= 47246749699 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 }; ReadAccess := { Stmt__12_cloned_[i0, i1, i2] -> NULL[o0] : o0 >= 47247802368 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 and o0 <= 47247802371 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 }; WriteAccess := { Stmt__12_cloned_[i0, i1, i2] -> NULL[o0] : o0 >= 47248855040 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 and o0 <= 47248855043 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 }; } <------------------------------ Scop: end -----------------------------------> <------------------------------ Scop: dep...
2013 Jan 02
2
[LLVMdev] [DragonEgg] [Polly] Should we expect DragonEgg to produce identical LLVM IR for identical GIMPLE?
On 01/01/2013 02:45 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > >> >> In our compiler we use a modified version LLVM Polly, which is very >> sensitive to >> proper code generation. Among the number of limitations, the loop region >> (enclosed by phi node on induction variable and branch) is required to >> be free >> of additional memory-dependent
2013 Jan 04
4
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Aliasing problems escalation (WAS: Re: [DragonEgg] [Polly] Should we expect DragonEgg to produce identical LLVM IR for identical GIMPLE?)
...84i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 and o0 <= 47246749699 + 16384i0 + 256i1 > + 4i2 }; > ReadAccess := > { Stmt__12_cloned_[i0, i1, i2] -> NULL[o0] : o0 >= > 47247802368 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 and o0 <= 47247802371 + 16384i0 + 256i1 > + 4i2 }; > WriteAccess := > { Stmt__12_cloned_[i0, i1, i2] -> NULL[o0] : o0 >= > 47248855040 + 16384i0 + 256i1 + 4i2 and o0 <= 47248855043 + 16384i0 + 256i1 > + 4i2 }; > } > <------------------------------ Scop: end > -----------------------------------> > <-----...