similar to: Manage an unknown and variable number of data frames

Hello I've been looking at a debuginfo issue on an out-of-tree target which uses DWARF aranges. The problem is that aranges are generated for both data and code objects, and the debugger gets confused when program addresses overlap data addresses. The target is a Harvard Architecture CPU, so the appearance of overlapping address ranges is not in itself a bug as they reside in different

Hi, I just updated from r190763 to r191137 and started getting failures in generated assembly language when debug info is enabled. Here is the test case: // Compile and run for every target. // RUN: %ecc -g -o %t %s && %t // FAIL: %armecc -g -o %t %s && %armrun %t // FAIL: %armebecc -g -o %t %s && %armebrun %t // RUN: %i386ecc -g -o %t %s && %i386run %t // FAIL:

Interesting. File please? Thanks. On Sep 21, 2013 6:01 AM, "Richard Pennington" <rich at pennware.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I just updated from r190763 to r191137 and started getting failures in > generated assembly language when debug info is enabled. Here is the test > case: > > // Compile and run for every target. > // RUN: %ecc -g -o %t %s && %t

If it thinks the symbol is in the BSS section, then it should never have tried to use .comm to emit it I think. On x86 it does not try to mix and match, which is why it works. AFAIK comm symbols are regarded as having no section, rather than being bss, so I think it's a bug in whatever code printed that .comm statement. I'll look into this tomorrow. > Eric Christopher

Guys, apache cpus usage is hitting 100% sometimes ( to such an extent that its very noticeable) on a box with just 8 users or so. i m getting this when i run 'top'. The worrying thing is seeing the work 'atack' under command PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 23119 apache 15 0 964 556 472 S 0.7 0.0 0:03.68 atack 23479 apache 15

Since my old Epson C86 has finally managed to clog up the print heads, I'm in the market for a replacement. I'd like to know what the people on this list are using for printers that are currently available, since we are using versions of CUPS and foomatic that are frozen, and any other issues or "gotchas" that you are aware of. For the replacement printer, I'm considering a

Hello R-user! I am running R 2.7.0 on a Power Book (Tiger). (I am still R and statistics beginner) I try to find the most important variables to divide my dataset as given in a categorical variable. code: Test.rf4<-randomForest(Sex~.,na.action=na.roughfix, data=Subset4, importance=TRUE, proximity=TRUE, ntree=10000, do.trace=1000, keep.forest=FALSE) My dataset contains also ordered

Estimado Jesús Para Fernández En teoría es ese material, lo vi muy rápido y en la parte genética tiene cosas que biológicamente no son así, hay un libro de Falconer, Introducción a la genética cuantitativa, que tiene escrita la parte matemática, hay un abismo entre la biología y los ingenieros que se inspiran en la biología. Yo pensaba en la resolución de un problema real, aunque relativamente

I have a simple cdr configured with the default tables, here is a row of a good cdr report calldate | clid | src | dst | dcontext | channel | ect ..... ect .... 2008-08-29 10:16:49 | "C. BOUTON" <40> | 40 | XXXXXXXXXXX | phonesystems | SIP/40-08776938 | ect ..... ect .... I have replaced the number by

Dear R-users, Does anybody know a good way to create and use several graphical devices at the same time in interactive mode? Ideally, I'd like to open 2 to 3 devices and assign names to them. This way, I could make any addition/modification/update to a particular device using its name. I did not see anything like a name argument in ?X11. Is there an alternative? Thanks in advance for your

Hi Damien, Thank you. I read the rationale. Just to summarize, a user writeable chroot target is considered dangerous if: 1) the user has another way of gaining non-chrooted access to the system 2) is able to create hardlinks to setuid-binaries outside of the chroot tree 3) there are bugs somewhere that allow privilige escalation or remote execution of other programs While all these

[was: Asking hard questions about the NUT architecture] Hy Eric, 2007/5/31, Eric S. Raymond <esr at thyrsus.com>: > Arnaud Quette <aquette.dev at gmail.com>: > > doc definitely! > > As mentioned earlier, I've tried several times to start a full > > rewrite, using docbook, to produce a friendly and complete html doc. > > But the facts are that the doc

I’ve encountered this kind of architecture before, a long time ago (academically). In a flat-address-space machine such as X64, there is still an instruction/data distinction, but usually only down at the level of I-cache versus D-cache (instruction fetch versus data fetch). A Harvard architecture machine exposes that to the programmer, which effectively doubles the available address space.

> -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Berlin [mailto:dberlin at dberlin.org] > Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 3:15 PM > To: Robinson, Paul > Cc: cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu Developers (cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu); LLVM Developers > Mailing List (llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu); lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] What does "debugger tuning" mean? > > On Fri, May

It is with regret that I announce that Shorewall development and support is officially ended. Sean''s post has finally driven it home to me that in the long term, trying to support a project like Shorewall is impossible for a person of my personality and age. Sean -- please believe that this isn''t about you or your post -- your post was just the proverbial straw on this old