similar to: Interpreting output from rsync

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "Interpreting output from rsync"

2007 Sep 09
2
Batch mode scenario ("use case")
Hello, I came up with this scenario of the use of batch mode while thinking of back-up schemes to use for myself. However, it could be that the last step needed in this scenario is not supported by rsync! Here's the scenario: At one time, /c/home/wer/work and /e/gold had identical content and were really huge (say, 200 GBytes). After some complex, intricate work, Mr. Wer
2007 Sep 12
1
Verifying understanding of backup-dir vs compare-dest
Hello, Say one starts with creating an archive rsync work -> archive and periodically (below, i = 1 to N) does rsync --backup-dir=a_<i> work -> archive and rsync --compare-dest=archive work -> b_<i> Then suppose one wants to recover the work directory as it was at time k. Using the b_<i> directories, one would merely merge
2007 Oct 01
6
why not a gui for rsync
I'm using rsync and I'm very glad, but, in some case, i'm not so happy. Some people are backing up the data with rsync but they have a lot of files, more than 100000 and 20 Gb of data. We are using batch files and the task scheduling system of windows. It is difficult to see if the backup is well done, sometimes, they are error. We try to make some gui, one in java, an other in c++
2019 Jun 21
2
Expected behavior of lld during LTO for global symbols (Attr Internal/Common)
Thanks for the info Teresa, Regards M Suresh From: Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 7:15 PM To: Mani, Suresh <Suresh.Mani at amd.com> Cc: Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Expected behavior of lld during LTO for global symbols (Attr Internal/Common) [CAUTION: External
2009 Feb 08
1
How to print console output statements from within script or function?
Dear R-Experts, Seek your help. I am calling say 20 functions one by one in one script. To reach the end, it takes approximately one hour. While R is performing calculations, I would like to print console output statements to track the progress.(e.g. "Result of function-1 is done") Note: I have already tried "print" however, it did not work. Thank you in advance. Regards,
2020 May 15
2
Issues with new Attributor (replaceAllUses fails with type mismatch)
Hi Suresh, thanks for reporting this! I thought I fixed this with 8d94d3c3b44c3a27a69b153cef9be4b8e481150e. Did you run before or after that commit? Cheers, Johannes On 5/15/20 7:17 AM, Mani, Suresh via llvm-dev wrote: > [AMD Public Use] > > Hi , > > Please ignore the earlier header of Internal and Official use only. > > Thanks > M Suresh > > From: llvm-dev
2015 Apr 16
2
Availability of the 1.1.1 stable version
To be decodable by opus_demo, you'll have to add the 8-byte "header". Just put in the length of the packet followed by "0" for the encoder range (0 means "not present"). That being said, from previous experience, the most likely cause of the crash is a bug in your software causing a corruption in Opus. So it's safe to assume that if you can't reproduce
2019 Jun 24
4
Expected behavior of lld during LTO for global symbols (Attr Internal/Common)
The direct cause of this issue is that, previously lld converted common symbols to defined symbols before passing input files to LTO, and after r360841 they are passed as common symbols to LTO. Making lld to work as before is easy, as we can convert common symbols to defined symbols as before. Here is a patch to do that, and I confirmed that that restores the original behavior for the reported
2015 Apr 20
1
Availability of the 1.1.1 stable version
Hi, We are able to reproduce the issue with the 1.1 opus_demo (sample file). We captured the frames in our server just before the opus_decode and fed the file to opus_demo (1.1) and it is crashing. Same file is tested with 1.1.1 and it is fine. So this is in line with our server testing observation and I think here we can conclude that the 1.1 library is crashing while handling a specific mode
2015 Apr 21
3
Availability of the 1.1.1 stable version
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.4 (Santiago) gcc version 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-3) (GCC) We see the issue in all our Intel based Linux servers. Thanks Suresh On 21 April 2015 at 12:41, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote: > Still can't reproduce. What OS and compiler version? > > Jean-Marc > > On 21/04/15 02:48 AM, Suresh Thiriveedi
2015 Apr 16
3
Availability of the 1.1.1 stable version
Please provide the input file that produces this with opus_demo. On 16/04/15 03:24 AM, Suresh Thiriveedi wrote: > Hi Jean-Marc, > > Could you please update if you got a chance to look into. As I > mentioned, I don't see the same issue in 1.1.1, but I don't see any > difference in 1.1.1 other than optimization based on the architecture. > This optimization could have
2015 Apr 21
2
Availability of the 1.1.1 stable version
Hi, There is no change in the compiler flags. I'm using as it is from the original code. No change in the Makefile and I believe it is using the floating point only by default. We are using 8k samples and mono so the commands is as follows. [root at MEDIA opus-1.1]# ./opus_demo -d 8000 1 opus_encoded_crash.opus opus_encoded_crash.pcm *And segmentation is as below..*. ............ Calling
2019 Jun 20
2
Expected behavior of lld during LTO for global symbols (Attr Internal/Common)
Hi Teresa, Can you please let me know if there is any update on this issue. Thanks M Suresh From: Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 7:23 PM To: Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> Cc: Mani, Suresh <Suresh.Mani at amd.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Expected behavior of lld during LTO for global symbols
2011 Jun 17
1
[LLVMdev] Loop Unroll Factor
Devang, I meant as an end user. -Suresh On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > Suresh, > > > On Jun 15, 2011, at 9:13 PM, Suresh Purini wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> What is the default loop-unroll factor in llvm? How can we specify >> our own unroll-factor? > > Here "we" means end user or a
2015 Apr 13
2
Availability of the 1.1.1 stable version
Hi Jean-Marc, Thanks for your response. Please find the details as below. *Backtrace we got for this crash:* #0 0x0000000000800c54 in opus_decode_frame (st=0x38906b8f99d09c5, data=0xf0aa10b4ef1008ae <Address 0xf0aa10b4ef1008ae out of bounds>, len=-188613428, pcm=0x6e80016085efd57, frame_size=44037315, decode_fec=58716895) at src/opus_decoder.c:384 #1 0x00000000008009c0 in
2011 Jun 16
0
[LLVMdev] Loop Unroll Factor
Suresh, On Jun 15, 2011, at 9:13 PM, Suresh Purini wrote: > Dear all, > > What is the default loop-unroll factor in llvm? How can we specify > our own unroll-factor? Here "we" means end user or a compiler developer ? The threshold is 150, see LoopUnrollPass.cpp - Devang
2015 Mar 04
1
Introducing myself
Hi, I am Susheel Suresh from Bangalore India. I am currently an undergrad student at PES Institute Of Technology and studying Computer Science. I am really interested in contributing to XIPH.org. I have experience in SQL, JSON , C,JAVA , PHP and have worked on a project which used node.js. So I am excited to work on the Stream Directory API. I have a fair experience in API design also. So please
2016 Oct 04
2
encoder with FEC+DTX enabled but not detecting noise
Hi, When we pass around 9K samples of only ambient noise (no voice), the encoder which is enabled FEC+DTX is detecting only some 140 frames as non-voice (returning only TOC, no frame content). We were expecting all or more to be identified as non-voice. Our idea was to check how the decoder re-generates the original ambient noise during the silence duration (when we feed NULL to decoder) when
2006 Mar 03
1
[LLVMdev] printing constants
Sir, Given code like: > > X = add int Y, 1 > Z = mul int X, 17 while I iterate over the operands of the first instruction i want to print the variable x ,as well as the constant 1 and while i iterate over the second instruction i want to print variable x and constant 17. what should I do? thanking you, yours sincerely, anubham suresh TU-Darmstadt --- llvmdev-request at
2008 Jul 15
4
Patch from LKML
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Suresh Siddha > <suresh.b.siddha at intel.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 10:19:35PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > >> > >> fix for pv. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel at gmail.com> > >> > >> --- > >> arch/x86/kernel/paravirt.c | 5 ---- > >>