similar to: openssh 3.6.1_p2 problem with pam (fwd)

Hi folks, we've tried contacting Jean-Marc Valin but email address bounces. We published yesterday an advisory about libfishsound, you can find it at the following URL: http://www.ocert.org/advisories/ocert-2008-2.html The issues seems to affect Speex (since the code is the same) versions <= 1.1.12. While the 1.2beta branch is not vulnerable we advise that you fix with a security release

Portable OpenSSH 3.7.1p2 has just been released. It will be available from the mirrors listed at http://www.openssh.com/portable.html shortly. Please note that this is a release to address issues in the portable version only. The items mentioned below do not affect the OpenBSD version. OpenSSH is a 100% complete SSH protocol version 1.3, 1.5 and 2.0 implementation and includes sftp client

Portable OpenSSH 3.7.1p2 has just been released. It will be available from the mirrors listed at http://www.openssh.com/portable.html shortly. Please note that this is a release to address issues in the portable version only. The items mentioned below do not affect the OpenBSD version. OpenSSH is a 100% complete SSH protocol version 1.3, 1.5 and 2.0 implementation and includes sftp client

rsync 2.5.6 security advisory ----------------------------- December 4th 2003 Background ---------- The rsync team has received evidence that a vulnerability in rsync was recently used in combination with a Linux kernel vulnerability to compromise the security of a public rsync server. While the forensic evidence we have is incomplete, we have pieced together the most likely way that this

rsync 2.5.6 security advisory ----------------------------- December 4th 2003 Background ---------- The rsync team has received evidence that a vulnerability in rsync was recently used in combination with a Linux kernel vulnerability to compromise the security of a public rsync server. While the forensic evidence we have is incomplete, we have pieced together the most likely way that this

Hi, I installed Star Trek Armada 2 on Ubuntu 8.10, but it doesn't work. The installation worked, but I'm not able to start the game. Here are the errors: http://astrophysiker.as.funpic.de/error.log Has anybody an idea whats going wrong? Thanks, Astro

Andrea Barisani a ?crit : > we've tried contacting Jean-Marc Valin but email address bounces. What email address did you use? This email address has always been listed for Speex. > We > published yesterday an advisory about libfishsound, you can find it at the > following URL: > > http://www.ocert.org/advisories/ocert-2008-2.html > > The issues seems to affect

Dear Rui, Not working. I have entirely removed the column containing % but am still bootless: > head(coredata(INFYTX)) INFY Historical Data INFY Historical Data INFY Historical Data INFY Historical Data [1,] "47.26" "44.28" "47.56" "44.28" [2,] "46.30" "44.92"

Isn't this like trying to tie up the horse after it has left the barn? Why not figure all this out _before_ converting to xts? On April 12, 2023 12:29:49 PM PDT, akshay kulkarni <akshay_e4 at hotmail.com> wrote: >Dear Rui, > Not working. I have entirely removed the column containing % but am still bootless: > >> head(coredata(INFYTX)) > INFY

?s 19:57 de 12/04/2023, akshay kulkarni escreveu: > Dear members, > I have an xts object: > >> head(INFYTX) > INFY Historical Data INFY Historical Data.1 INFY Historical Data.2 > 2003-04-16 "47.26" "44.28" "47.56" > 2003-04-17 "46.30" "44.92"

Dear members, I have an xts object: > head(INFYTX) INFY Historical Data INFY Historical Data.1 INFY Historical Data.2 2003-04-16 "47.26" "44.28" "47.56" 2003-04-17 "46.30" "44.92" "46.53" 2003-04-21 "45.82"

On 2024-09-05 4:23 p.m., Leo Mada via R-help wrote: > Dear R Users, > > Is this desired behaviour? > I presume it's a bug. > > atan(1i) > # 0+Infi > > tan(atan(1i)) > # 0+1i > > atan(1i) / 5 > # NaN+Infi There's no need to involve atan() and tan() in this: > (0+Inf*1i)/5 [1] NaN+Infi Why do you think this is a bug? Duncan Murdoch

> complex(real = 0, imaginary = Inf) [1] 0+Infi > Inf*1i [1] NaN+Infi >> complex(real = 0, imaginary = Inf)/5 [1] NaN+Infi See the Note in ?complex for the explanation, I think. Duncan can correct if I'm wrong. -- Bert On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 3:20?PM Leo Mada <leo.mada at syonic.eu> wrote: > Dear Bert, > > These behave like real divisions/multiplications: >

Dear Bert, These behave like real divisions/multiplications: complex(re=Inf, im = Inf) * 5 # Inf+Infi complex(re=-Inf, im = Inf) * 5 # -Inf+Infi The real division / multiplication should be faster and also is well behaved. I was expecting R to do the real division/multiplication on a complex number. Which R actually does for these very particular cases; but not when only Im(x) is Inf.

atan(1i) -> 0 + Inf i complex(1/5) -> 0.2 + 0i atan(1i) -> (0 + Inf i) * (0.2 + 0i) -> 0*0.2 + 0*0i + Inf i * 0.2 + Inf i * 0i infinity times zero is undefined -> 0 + 0i + Inf i + NaN * i^2 -> 0 + 0i + Inf i - NaN -> NaN + Inf i I am not sure how complex arithmetic could arrive at another answer. I advise against messing with infinities... use atan2() if you don't

Perhaps > Inf*1i [1] NaN+Infi clarifies why it is *not* a bug. (Boy, did that jog some long dusty math memories :-) ) -- Bert On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 2:48?PM Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> wrote: > On 2024-09-05 4:23 p.m., Leo Mada via R-help wrote: > > Dear R Users, > > > > Is this desired behaviour? > > I presume it's a bug. > >

Dear R Users, Is this desired behaviour? I presume it's a bug. atan(1i) # 0+Infi tan(atan(1i)) # 0+1i atan(1i) / 5 # NaN+Infi There were some changes in handling of complex numbers. But it looks like a bug. Sincerely, Leonard [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

-----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of asterisk-users-request at lists.digium.com Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 10:51 PM To: asterisk-users at lists.digium.com Subject: asterisk-users Digest, Vol 37, Issue 88 Send asterisk-users mailing list submissions to asterisk-users at lists.digium.com

On 2024-09-05 6:12 p.m., Leo Mada wrote: > Dear Duncan, > > Here is also the missing information: > R version 4.4.1 (2024-06-14 ucrt) > Platform: x86_64-w64-mingw32/x64 > Running under: Windows 10 x64 (build 19045) > > Regarding the results: > atan(1i) > #?0+Infi > Re(atan(1i)) > # 0 > Im(atan(1i)) > #? Inf > > 0 + Inf i is a valid complex number:

I expect that atan(1i) = (0 + infinity i) and that atan(1i)/5 = (0 + infinity i)/5 = (0 + infinity i). Here's what I get in C: (0,1) = (0, 1) atan((0,1)) = (0, inf) atan((0,1))/5 = (0, inf) Note the difference between I*infinity = (0,1)*infinity = (0*infinity,1*infinity) = (NaN,infinity) and (0,infinity)/5 = (0/5,infinity/5) = (0,infinity). The former involves multiplying 0 by infinity, which