similar to: `*deleting' itemize output misaligned

I'm adding a new escape to log-format, %s, to print out the checksum of a file, and I've got a couple problems. They've got to be simple bugs, but I haven't been able to figure them out. The following patch gives me a broken pipe and a bus error when I test it. Note that I've applied the md5 patch beforehand. diff -Naur rsync-2.6.5-md5/log.c rsync-2.6.5/log.c ---

Hi, what gnu-linux distro do you guys recommend in order to get rock solid runing the L7-filter? or what are probed to runt it? Thanks in advance Aldo -- Live as a tortoise. and rate my mullet: http://www.ratemymullet.com/

Hi >i have this data > X [1] 5.79 1579.52 2323.70 68.85 426.07 110.29 108.29 1067.60 17.05 22.66 [11] 21.02 175.88 139.07 144.12 20.46 43.40 194.90 47.30 7.74 0.40 [21] 82.85 9.88 89.29 215.10 1.75 0.79 15.93 3.91 0.27 0.69 [31] 100.58 27.80 13.95 53.24 0.96 4.15 0.19 0.78 8.01 31.75 [41] 7.35 6.50

Hello all, I have a simple function which calculates summary statistics of a dataset in terms of a factor (say area). > x = data.frame(Area = c(rep("cleanup", 5), rep("ref", 5)), TcCB = c(rnorm(5)+2, rnorm(5)));x Area TcCB 1 cleanup 2.5829747 2 cleanup 2.6796868 3 cleanup 2.5437094 4 cleanup 2.8453616 5 cleanup 1.1789683 6 ref 1.0140391 7

Hello all! I have a problem with R. I try to merge data like this: structure(c(2.1785, 1.868, 2.1855, 2.5175, 2.025, 2.435, 1.809, 1.628, 1.327, 1.3485, 1.4335, 2.052, 2.2465, 2.151, 1.7945, 1.79, 1.6055, 1.616, 1.633, 1.665, 2.002, 2.152, 1.736, 1.7985, 1.9155, 1.7135, 1.548, 1.568, 1.713, 2.079, 1.875, 2.12, 2.072, 1.906, 1.4645, 1.3025, 1.407, 1.5445, 1.437, 1.463, 1.5235, 1.609, 1.738, 1.478,

I'm running a multinomial logit in R using the Zelig packages. According to str(trade962a), my dependent variable is a factor with three levels. When I run the multinomial logit I get an error message. However, when I run 'model=logit' it works fine. any ideas on whats wrong? ## MULTINOMIAL LOGIT anes96two <- zelig(trade962a ~ age962 + education962 + personal962 + economy962 +

Hello all! I have a problem to extract values greater that for example 1820. I try this code: x[x[,1]>1820,]->x1 Please help me! Thank you! The data structure is: structure(c(2.576, 1.728, 3.434, 2.187, 1.928, 1.886, 1.2425, 1.23, 1.075, 1.1785, 1.186, 1.165, 1.732, 1.517, 1.4095, 1.074, 1.618, 1.677, 1.845, 1.594, 1.6655, 1.1605, 1.425, 1.099, 1.007, 1.1795, 1.3855, 1.4065, 1.138, 1.514,

On 11 November 2011 02:33, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > It's a known issue that the x86 backend doesn't know how to generate > dynamic stack realignment code for functions using allocas outside the > entry block.  Don't know the bug number off the top of my head. These ones look relevant: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2962

Hi edA-qa mort-ora-y, On 12/05/13 17:13, edA-qa mort-ora-y wrote: > I'm trying to determine how to do my packed structure compilation and am > a bit unclear about how packed structures are handled. Consider this > structure: > > %struct.packed = type <{ i8, i32 }> > > Now if I get a pointer to the i32 element the pointer will not be > properly aligned for a

On 12/05/13 17:50, Duncan Sands wrote: > in LLVM, pointer types don't have an alignment associated with them. > Instead it is pointer operations that have an alignment (when relevant), > for example load and store instructions have an optional alignment. So > you need to put the alignment information onto the loads and stores that > you generate in your front-end. Okay, so I

Am 22.04.2016 um 12:40 schrieb g <geleem at bellsouth.net>: > greetings. > > centos 6.7 [current] > > > 'disk utility' has started showing message; > > WARNING: The partition is misaligned by 2560 bytes. This may > result in very poor performance. Repartitioning is suggested. > > for sdc5 - /home partition. > > /dev/sdc5 302243312

On 04/22/16 05:40, g wrote: <> > suggestions for correcting above boundaries also appreciated. > > help needed and greatly appreciated. > ===> thank you all for replies. most helpful. now to decide which way to format a new drive that i now have on order. after reading replies, i feel easiest way to get a good partition layout was a complete repartitioning and formatting.

On 04/22/2016 09:43 AM, g wrote: > ]$ sudo blockdev --getalignoff /dev/sdc1 > 0 > ]$ sudo blockdev --getalignoff /dev/sdc2 > 0 > ]$ sudo blockdev --getalignoff /dev/sdc5 > 2560 > ]$ sudo blockdev --report /dev/sdc1 > RO RA SSZ BSZ StartSec Size Device > rw 256 512 4096 2048 838860800 /dev/sdc1 > ]$ sudo blockdev --report

Hello, I recently noticed a small bug in the doveadm table formatter: hidden titles may cause the headers to be misaligned. The behavior in question was introduced by commit <http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/210282ae46e1> and doveadm -f table quota get -A may be used to reproduce it. Most simple patch attached: it simply restores the old behavior, to some extent. Actually hiding

I'm trying to determine how to do my packed structure compilation and am a bit unclear about how packed structures are handled. Consider this structure: %struct.packed = type <{ i8, i32 }> Now if I get a pointer to the i32 element the pointer will not be properly aligned for a typical i32. On my current machine (x86_64) the cpu doesn't seem to care, but I suspect this isn't

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Aaron Dwyer <Aaron.Dwyer at imgtec.com> wrote: > Using LLVM 2.9, the following LLVM IR produces invalid x86 32 bit assembly > (a misaligned SSE store). > ; ModuleID = 'MisalignedStore' > define void @MisalignedStore() nounwind readnone { > entry: >   %v = alloca <4 x float>, align 16 >   store <4 x float>

Hi! UBSan bootstrap bot fails with error report on 5 llvm-cov and llvm-profdata lit-tests: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/builds/4526/steps/check-llvm%20ubsan/logs/stdio Also see http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20815. The error reports look vaild: in general it's incorrect to load uint64_t, or even structures like "RawHeader" or

When syncing from Linux to Aix --itemize-changes with --perms lists directories every time because the high-order st_mode bits for directories differ between the two systems, and itemize() isn't masking them with CHMOD_BITS. Here is a fix, tested with 2.6.6pre1. PS: I'm not subscribed to this mailing list, please Cc: if you need more info from me. Thanks. --- generator.c.~1~ Thu Jun

On 04/22/16 08:19, Leon Fauster wrote: <<>> > check it with: > > blockdev --getalignoff /dev/sd > > (if a '0' is returned, the partition is aligned) > ===> Leon, thank you for reply. ]$ sudo blockdev --getalignoff /dev/sdc1 0 ]$ sudo blockdev --getalignoff /dev/sdc2 0 ]$ sudo blockdev --getalignoff /dev/sdc5 2560 ]$ sudo blockdev --report /dev/sdc1 RO

Using LLVM 2.9, the following LLVM IR produces invalid x86 32 bit assembly (a misaligned SSE store). ; ModuleID = 'MisalignedStore' define void @MisalignedStore() nounwind readnone { entry: %v = alloca <4 x float>, align 16 store <4 x float> zeroinitializer, <4 x float>* %v, align 16 br label %post-block post-block: %f = alloca float ret void } If I feed