similar to: Re: Does wine support rts. program?

anybody tell me does wine supported rts program.. ?

NICE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! im here waiting for the progress admin :) tnx i appreciated that you trying to help me :( :) :) TNX :) :) :)

That's a good question. never heard it before..!!

Fr??d??ric Delanoy wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 05:28, joven15 <wineforum-user at winehq.org> wrote: > > > Clang clang !! Still waiting :( > > > > We know you're still waiting. You've made that clear many times already. > Please don't do that all the time: it just annoys people and won't > speed up the resolution of your issue. Agreed.

wahh :( :( so how can you get some demo files?

There's nothing really noteworthy in that log, I'm afraid. The best way forward is for a wine developer to get a copy of this software so s/he can see the error for themselves, I'm afraid. And even then it's not clear they'll be able to fix it. You're not quite the first person to ask about this: http://community.sageaccpac.com/forums/p/189/571.aspx And about four years

When i run the application theres something error PROGRAM ERROR then blah blah anyone help me how to configure this application:(

Hi, I have a data set with variables that are _not_ missing at random. Now I use a package for learning a Bayesian Network which won't accept NA as a value. From a database I query data.frames with k,k+n,k+2n, ... variables (there are always at least k variables as leftmost columns). Using rbind.fill from the reshape package on two data frames I would get a data frame like trg_type

Greetings, As previously reported by me to the Debian bug tracking system: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- An access list in rsyncd.conf may contain hostnames as well as addresses. It may contain several patterns to match against. address_match (in access.c) does this by trying to match hostname and address against each of the patterns until a match is

innetgr.. much easier.. Had a look for the user section but didn't find it in my 15 seconds of looking.. --- access.c 2003-07-30 16:12:27.000000000 +1000 +++ ../rsync-2.6.0-Linux/access.c 2004-02-01 23:21:12.000000000 +1100 @@ -22,10 +22,21 @@ */ #include "rsync.h" +#include <netdb.h> static int match_hostname(char *host, char *tok) { + char

This change adds the ability to group entries in a string list with single quotes. So the string: "'foo bar'" becomes 1 token rather than 2. Consequently single quotes must now be escaped: "\'" resolves to a literal single quote. Incidentally, this change also alters another, probably unintentional behaviour of the previous implementation, in that tokens are

Hi MyDeveloperDay, We are using the released version of clang-format / clang-tidy (not necessarily the latest release). I think it makes sense to use most recent versions of the tools: https://github.com/google/llvm-premerge-checks/issues/196 Kind regards, Mikhail On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 3:40 PM MyDeveloper Day <mydeveloperday at gmail.com> wrote: > Mikhail > > Firstly let me

Hi, I'm trying to get rsync 2.5.6 to authenticate users via openldap-2.0.23. I was looking through the mailing list archives and found a patch for rsync-2.4.6 that does this for me. I was just wondering if this is still valid, or if there has been a new patch or new implementation that has superceded this patch. Any help would be great. The message I am referring to is as follows:

Hi all, I am attempting to get Sage to support their software if the files are on Samba (Linux). They (like a lot of people I've heard) say "We don't support Linux, Goodbye." even when the client is on Win98/NT. We have been having trouble on a particular site, and they refuse to support Sage Line 50 if the files are on Linux which is absurd, because Linux is much more

I'm trying to use linphone-android with asterisk but there is an aspect of the way asterisk and linphone-android interact with MESSAGE transactions that is causing problems. The linphone-android folks consider both the To: and From: address in MESSAGE transactions when deciding which "chat" to put a received MESSAGE into. Every combination of To: and From: address are a separate

> On Jan 20, 2017, at 11:17 AM, Tian, Xinmin <xinmin.tian at intel.com> wrote: > >>>>> This means that the optimizer has to be aware of it, I’m missing the magic here? > > This is one option. > > The another option is that, as I mentioned in our LLVM-HPC paper in our implementation. We have a "prepare phase for pre-privatization" can be invoked

>>>>Ok, but this looks like a “workaround" for your specific use-case, I don’t see how it can scale as a model-agnostic and general-purpose region semantic. I would say it is a design trade-off. Regardless it is a new instruction or an intrinsics with token/tag, it will consist of model-agnostic part and model-non-agnostic part. The package comes with a framework for parsing

> On Jan 31, 2017, at 5:38 PM, Tian, Xinmin <xinmin.tian at intel.com> wrote: > >>>>> Ok, but this looks like a “workaround" for your specific use-case, I don’t see how it can scale as a model-agnostic and general-purpose region semantic. > > I would say it is a design trade-off. I’m not sure if we’re talking about the same thing here: my understanding at

Let me try this. You can simply consider the prepare-phase (e.g. pre-privatization) were done in FE (actually a library can be used by multiple FEs at LLVM IR level), the region is run with 1 thread, region annotation (scope, single-entry-single-exit) as memory barrier conservatively for now (instead of checking individual memory dependency, aliasing via tags which is the actual

> On Jan 31, 2017, at 6:48 PM, Tian, Xinmin <xinmin.tian at intel.com> wrote: > > Let me try this. > > You can simply consider the prepare-phase (e.g. pre-privatization) were done in FE (actually a library can be used by multiple FEs at LLVM IR level), the region is run with 1 thread, region annotation (scope, single-entry-single-exit) as memory barrier conservatively