similar to: Missing CallingPres Application

From the Wiki: Presentation indicator (octet 3a) Bits 7 6 Meaning 0 0 Presentation allowed 0 1 Presentation restricted 1 0 Number not available due to interworking 1 1 Reserved Screening indicator (octet 3a) Bits 2 1 Meaning 0 0 User-provided, not screened 0 1 User-provided, verified and passed 1 0 User-provided, verified and failed 1 1 Network provided How do these bits fit into

Dear Everybody, I have to store variable from ${CALLINGPRES} and get birth date of our client and get back to him his birth prediction as numerology (numerology digit value is between 1-9). I have also mentioned below example here suppose client's birth date is 27-01-2000 then 2+7+0+1+2+0+0+0 = 12 and then 1+2 = 3. 3 is result so client can get his prediction as this 3 digit. Please

Dear all I'm not sure if I did the right analysis for my specific split splot design. We are studying biomass increase with different CO2 concentrations with four different functional plant groups (e.g. grasses, herbs, broad-leafed trees and conifers). Of each functional plant group we have four species. The design is orthogonal. The design is: Blocks: 2 (climate chambers, called

Hi Bryan and other klibc people. I have taken a stamp on the Makefiles for klibc, this is what I came up with. 1) No longer recompile on every invocation 2) Correct checking on dependencies 3) Simpler makefile syntax (almost all over the place) I compile-time tested it only. Two open issues: a) Do we realy use .a files for initramfs. I renemed that to the executable. b) I renamed

@fsp Please forward to development, manufacturing and quality management department: Model EP1000(PPF6000/100), 431107300095, 4711140480534, Art-Nr. 8296861, 70539, 14Z00000, 35-0200116-01G @nut-users http://www.networkupstools.org/ 2.4.3 debian stable, 2.6.2 upstream, linux 2.6.38-debian-bpo # /usr/local/src/nut-2.6.2/drivers/blazer_usb -u root -DDDDD -a ups Network UPS Tools - Megatec/Q1

I'm fitting nonlinear functions to some growth data but I'm getting radically different results in R to another program (Prism). Furthermore the values from the other program give a better fit and seem more realistic. I think there is a problem with the results from the r nls function. The differences only occur with weighted data so I think I'm making a mistake in the weighting.