similar to: Broken DNS makes Asterisk whacky!

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1100 matches similar to: "Broken DNS makes Asterisk whacky!"

2011 Jun 01
2
[LLVMdev] Fw: Thinking about "whacky" backends
Sorry, forgot to CC the list. ----- Forwarded Message ----- > From: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > To: Joachim Durchholz <jo at durchholz.org> > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 9:35 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends > > Hello, > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Joachim Durchholz
2011 Jun 01
0
[LLVMdev] Fw: Thinking about "whacky" backends
On May 31, 2011, at 7:36 PM, Samuel Crow wrote: <snip> >> >> Now my idea for a whacky backend: Just a wrapper of the bitcode writer with its >> own special target triple: bitcode-tarrget-neutral and a generic data layout >> that aligns to single bytes as a placeholder only. It should disallow >> overriding the alignment of individual instructions to avoid
2011 Jun 01
5
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
I've been tossing around some ideas about high-level backends. Say, have LLVM emit Perl code. Sounds whacky but isn't. It's good for the first bootstrapping phase in environments where you don't have a C compiler, where you don't have a cross-compiled binary for download, but you can execute Perl. It also makes a great inspect-the-sources-with-an-editor stage for aspiring
2011 Jun 03
1
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 14:44:05 -0400 From: Nate Fries <nfries88 at yahoo.com> To: Joachim Durchholz <jo at durchholz.org> On 6/3/2011 1:38 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Am 01.06.2011 23:25, schrieb Nate Fries: >> That said, it seems like it ought to be possible to do
2011 Jun 04
0
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
----- Original Message ----- > From: Nate Fries <nfries88 at yahoo.com> > To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com>; LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Cc: > Sent: Friday, June 3, 2011 6:52 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends > > Most JVMs perform terribly. Even Sun's has had notable performance
2011 Jun 02
4
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
Hi Nate, I've successfully ported one bitcode from Linux to Mac to Windows.  All were x86 and the program was text-based, but I'd say my LLVM Wrapper would be worth some effort in the future if I could just get some help.  Currently it just wraps StdIO.h with its own functions. Here's some of what it would take to make portable bitcodes in C or LLVM Assembly: * Convert all
2011 Jun 01
2
[LLVMdev] Fw: Thinking about "whacky" backends
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Henry Mason <thefridgeowl at gmail.com> wrote: > This is pretty much what's happening with Portable Native Client, right? > > http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl > > See also the first presentation from the November LLVM meeting: http://llvm.org/devmtg/2010-11/ PNaCl fixes data layout to be just "portable enough" to cover
2011 Jun 03
2
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
On 6/3/2011 3:19 PM, Samuel Crow wrote: > Why not runtime checks? The constant folding and dead-code elimination passes would get rid of any redundant code in a later stage of compilation anyway. The important part, as I see it, is that LLVM already does constant folding and dead-code elimination. Meta-data might require more effort in the long run. > > --snip-- Less flexible for the
2011 Jun 01
0
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
What benefit do you get from having a backend here rather than an interpreter for LLVM IR? Cameron On May 31, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > I've been tossing around some ideas about high-level backends. > > Say, have LLVM emit Perl code. > > Sounds whacky but isn't. It's good for the first bootstrapping phase in > environments where you don't
2011 Jun 03
1
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
Am 01.06.2011 23:25, schrieb Nate Fries: > That said, it seems like it ought to be possible to do the same thing > by emitting bitcode for all supported platform/arch combinations Wait... is bitcode not platform-agnostic? I thought it is. > and > compressing them in an archive, then decompressing and either > interpreting or JIT-compiling the appropriate bitcode for the >
2011 Jun 03
0
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> writes: > Here's some of what it would take to make portable bitcodes in C or LLVM Assembly: A look at the work done on ANDF in the 90's may be helpful. I've only skimmed it but there's been some deep thinking about stuff like this. -Dave
2011 Jun 01
0
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
Cameron Zwarich wrote: > What benefit do you get from having a backend here rather than an interpreter for LLVM IR? The same thing as an interpreter, just a native build (no need for an interpreter program, better speed, etc). This would be beneficial anywhere that "build once, deploy anywhere" functionality is desired, without resorting to using a higher-level language like C# or
2004 Aug 06
2
Icecast server YP Woes... take 2
At 01:42 PM 4/12/2004, you wrote: >D. Willock wrote: > >>What I saw of the output of tcpdump didn't show any mention of the yp >>url. The communications seem to run only between the client and the >>server and nowhere else. This is the dump I got: > >If I may jump in here since my previous thread/problem went unsolved ;-) > >I've got nothing for a dump
2011 Jun 02
0
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
On 6/2/2011 10:13 AM, Samuel Crow wrote: > Hi Nate, > > I've successfully ported one bitcode from Linux to Mac to Windows. All were x86 and the program was text-based, but I'd say my LLVM Wrapper would be worth some effort in the future if I could just get some help. Currently it just wraps StdIO.h with its own functions Naturally that would work perfectly fine on a similar
2011 Jun 01
4
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
Am 01.06.2011 04:57, schrieb Cameron Zwarich: > What benefit do you get from having a backend here rather than an interpreter for LLVM IR? A backend that's self-sufficient and covers the entire Unixoid world. That cuts down on the number of binaries that one needs to provide for autoinstallers and such. Generated Perl could be used to bootstrap an LLVM IR interpreter, for example.
2008 Dec 18
1
vbscript in wine
Hi there, I'm having an issue with vbscript in wine. It relates to a problem with the cardbox database client which you can see here: http://www.cardbox.com/wine.htm I get the Cardbox error message and pressing OK will return me to the Cardbox window, indicating vbscript is not installed. First I just ran the installer which I found here:
2007 Oct 18
3
verify before deploy
so I have this sudo module that I''ve been working on: class auth::sudo { package { sudo: ensure => installed } file { sudo_config: name => "/tmp/sudoers", owner => "root", group => "root", mode => 0440, notify => Exec["sudoers-syntax"], source => [
2006 Jun 14
2
Calls keep ringing after being picked up
Hi all, using * 1.2.9.1 and this week all of the sudden calls keep ringing even after they've been picked up... Here's one users summary: When I pick up the phone, I hear a dial tone and I am able to dial out. But for some odd reason, the receiving line picks up while the outgoing line is still ringing. And the receiving line can hear everything while the phone is still ringing. I tested
2010 Jul 30
4
Concept questions: Extra battery packs & additional UPSes...
* Is there a way to configure NUT so that it recognizes the huge additional battery pack that has been attached to the 2200XL? The 51minutes runtime is a number consistent with the load we have placed on a stock standalone 2200XL. With the extra large battery pack we've added, the runtime should be more than 2.5 hours. * I see the "Bizzare configuration" graphic on the
2002 Oct 31
1
winelib: porting Delphi apps
Just a (probably crazy) thought: What about porting Windoze apps that aren't written in C? I've got a Delphi application that currently runs under Virtual PC under OS 9.2 on an eMac (PPC Processor), which would run much faster without those OS layers in between. I don't really have a clue as to whether this really far-out-whacky or not cuz I am not really a Delphi, or, for that matter,