similar to: known_hosts(5) man page

Le 25/10/2009 01:23, openssh-unix-dev-request at mindrot.org a ?crit : > Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:15:05 -0700 > From: Dave Yost<Dave at Yost.com> > To:"openssh-unix-dev at mindrot.org" <openssh-unix-dev at mindrot.org> > Subject: known_hosts(5) man page > Message-ID:<pdy98830624081ac70939292f43@[192.168.1.2]> > Content-Type: text/plain;

Hi Ivan, thanks for writing it up. This is a pretty long thread, and there are many good points brought up in the heated discussions. Here is my take on many of the points that have been mentioned: 1) The type based aliasing IR annotation should be generic enough to represent aliasing constraints for any frontend languages; 2) The offset based aliasing rules and type based aliasing rule have a

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > On 08/20/2017 08:47 PM, Xinliang David Li via llvm-dev wrote: > > Hi Ivan, thanks for writing it up. This is a pretty long thread, and there > are many good points brought up in the heated discussions. Here is my take > on many of the points that have been mentioned: > > 1) The type based

Hi. On http://openssh.org/manual.html I think there should be authorized_keys(5) known_hosts(5) Can an authorized_keys entry say something like from=192.168.1.32,192.168.1.33 command=/bin/foo ... or do I need to make a separate entry for each IP address? Thanks Dave

What does it require to run the example on page 263 of Venables/Ripley book using R 1.3.0? I got the following error and I have no clue how to correct it. Thank you very much. (If you reply to the list, please send a copy to me.) > lmix2 <- deriv3( + ~ -log(p*dnorm((x-u1)/s1)/s1 + (1-p)*dnorm((x-u2)/s2)/s2), + c("p", "u1", "s1", "u2",

As of release samba-1.9.16p11, the X option (exclude file) for tar creates doesn't work recursively; if the exclude file is a directory, files that are in the directory or subdirectories are not excluded from the tar create. I would like the exclude feature to work recursively, and attached is a patch to do it. The exclude feature works the same way for both create and extracts. ***

Hello there, I wish to solve the following nonlinear System of equations: + u1 - Vmax11*S1/(S1 + Km11 *(1 + S2/Km21)) - Vmax12*S1/( S1 + Km12 *(1+S2/Km22)) == 0 + u2 - Vmax22*S2/(S2 + Km22 *(1 + S1/Km12)) - Vmax21*S2/( S2 + Km21 *(1+S1/Km11)) == 0 + Vmax11*S1/(S1 + Km11 *(1 + S2/Km21)) + Vmax12*S1/( S1 + Km12 *(1+S2/Km22)) - d1*P1 == 0 + Vmax22*S2/(S2 + Km22 *(1 + S1/Km12)) + Vmax21*S2/( S2 +

Dear all, I am having trouble creating summary tables using aggregate function. given the following table: Var1 Var2 Var3 dummy S1 T1 I 1 S1 T1 I 1 S1 T1 D 1 S1 T1 D 1 S1 T2 I 1 S1 T2 I 1 S1 T2 D 1 S1 T2 D 1 S2

Hi James, So does this mean if the instruction could set the overflow flag, the instruction should not have [(set ... )] in it's pattern, i see this is the difference in instruction description for the mips case. I'm wondering how llvm knows when to use certain compare instructions such as SETNE or SETUNE? And for sign or zero extending loads? I can see the PatFrags described and the

Hi Linfeng, On 06/02/17 02:51 PM, Linfeng Zhang wrote: > However, the critical thing is that all the states in each stage when > processing input[i] are reused by the next input[i+1]. That is > input[i+1] must wait input[i] for 1 stage, and input[i+2] must wait > input[i+1] for 1 stage, etc. That is indeed the tricky part... and the one I think you could do slightly differently. If

I've done a decent size update of the OpenSSH portable from the upstream tree. There is an AES upgrade that needs to take place, but I need people to test and tell me what endedness changes need to be applied (if any). Attached is the patch. It is geared towards the latter snapshots..Unsure how it will patch (if at all) against 2.9pX series. Thanks. - Ben "This is dark day in

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:01:21 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Morten Ofstad wrote: > > > This is my first post on this mailing list, so bear with me... My name > > is Morten Ofstad and I work for Hue AS (www.hue.no), a company that > > makes 3D Visualization software. We are looking into using LLVM for JIT > >

Hi, I'm trying to get maximum likelihood estimates of \alpha, \beta_0 and \beta_1, this can be achieved by solving the following three equations: n / \alpha + \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} ln(\psihat(i)) - \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} ( ln(x_i + \psihat(i)) ) = 0 \alpha \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} 1/(psihat(i)) - (\alpha+1) \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} ( 1 / (x_i + \psihat(i)) ) = 0 \alpha \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} (

Hi I'm getting the intercepts of the Random effects as 0. Please help me to understand why this is coming Zero This is my R code Data<- read.csv("C:/FE and RE.csv") Formula="Y~X2+X3+X4 + (1|State) + (0+X5|State)" fit=lmer(formula=Formula,data=Data) ranef(fit). My sample Data State Year Y X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 S2 1960 27.8 397.5 42.2 50.7 78.3 65.8 S1 1960 29.9 413.3 38.1

Hi I'm getting the intercepts of the Random effects as 0. Please help me to understand why this is coming Zero This is my R code Data<- read.csv("C:/FE and RE.csv") Formula="Y~X2+X3+X4 + (1|State) + (0+X5|State)" fit=lmer(formula=Formula,data=Data) ranef(fit). My sample Data State Year Y X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 S2 1960 27.8 397.5 42.2 50.7 78.3 65.8 S1 1960 29.9 413.3 38.1

Hi Linfeng, On 06/02/17 07:18 PM, Linfeng Zhang wrote: > This is a great idea. But the order (psEncC->shapingLPCOrder) can be > configured to 12, 14, 16, 20 and 24 according to complexity parameter. > > It's hard to get a universal function to handle all these orders > efficiently. Any suggestions? I can think of two ways of handling larger orders. The obvious one is

Hello, I have a problem with rsync and hard links : I have 1 folder : P, with 2 subfolders : S1 and S2 S2 contains a lot of hard links to file stored in folder S1. P : -S1 -S2 (S2 files hard links to S1 files) I would like to rsync the folder P to another computer, but each sub folder S1 (110 Go) and S2 (10 Go + hard link to 100 Go of S1) contains thousands of thousands of

Hi Xiaoyi, this looks like a bug to me - please file a bug report. Ciao, Duncan. On 01/11/12 04:35, Guo, Xiaoyi wrote: > I have three modules: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > s1.ll: > > %0 = type <{ i32, i32 }> > > define void @s1(%0* byval %myStruct) nounwind { > return: > ret void > } >

I have three modules: ----------------------------------------------------------------- s1.ll: %0 = type <{ i32, i32 }> define void @s1(%0* byval %myStruct) nounwind { return: ret void } ----------------------------------------------------------------- s2.ll: %0 = type <{ i32, i32 }> define void @s2(%0* byval %myStruct) nounwind { return: ret void }

Hi Jean-Marc, Attached is the silk_warped_autocorrelation_FIX_neon() which implements your idea. Speed improvement vs the previous optimization: Complexity 0-4: Doesn't call this function. Complexity 5: 2.1% (order = 16) Complexity 6: 1.0% (order = 20) Complexity 8: 0.1% (order = 24) Complexity 10: 0.1% (order = 24) Code size of silk_warped_autocorrelation_FIX_neon() changes from 2,644