similar to: creating new shares and restarting SMB

Wall Server: lfknplnm03 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Mail-Info From: Webmaster <samba@samba.org> To: undisclosed-recipients: ; samba@samba.org CC: Rec.: preston.newton@txucom.com Date: 12/19/2003 06:05:53 AM Subject: [Samba] So sweet ...

Hello, If I make a change to the smb.conf file. Can I simply invoke 'smbcontrol all reload-config', or must I kill all samba services and restart them? -- -James

Hi all, Unfortunately, all my Hunks are failed when I apply : patch -p1 < da.patch command. The problem might be due to the fact that da.patch file was created against revision 167549, but I am on revision 167719 (I believe the most recent one). I am not sure if this cause the problem ? But Preston may I ask you to generate the patch file against revison 167719 ? Thanks in advance. On

Preston, thanks for the explanation and patch. Now it's printing the direction and distance values. On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Preston Briggs <preston.briggs at gmail.com>wrote: > Erkan, you're right. Sorry about that. > Attached is the most recent version. > > Preston > > > > Hi Preston, >> I am trying to use DA as well. I used your example

Hello, OpenSSH 2.5.1p1 running under AIX 4.3.3ML06. When I send a HUP signal to the parent sshd, that parent process dies, it's children get "adopted" by init, and the following message is put in the error log ... Mar 13 12:01:48 whippet sshd[31644]: Received SIGHUP; restarting. Mar 13 12:01:48 whippet sshd[31644]: RESTART FAILED: av[0]='sshd', error: No such file or

On 13.11.2012, at 10:46, erkan diken <erkandiken at gmail.com> wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately, all my Hunks are failed when I apply : patch -p1 < da.patch command. The problem might be due to the fact that da.patch file was created against revision 167549, but I am on revision 167719 (I believe the most recent one). I am not sure if this cause the problem ? But Preston may I ask you to

Erkan, you're right. Sorry about that. Attached is the most recent version. Preston Hi Preston, > I am trying to use DA as well. I used your example and commands that you > wrote in order to get DA information. > However, it does not report any dependence info. > I am wondering whether your local copy differs from the one on the > repository ? > Thanks. > Erkan.

> On Sep 10, 2018, at 5:25 PM, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com> wrote: > > > >> On Sep 10, 2018, at 5:11 PM, Preston Briggs <preston.briggs at gmail.com <mailto:preston.briggs at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> The phi instruction is irrelevant; just the way I think about things. >> The question is if the allocator believes that t0 and t2

Yes, I quite liked the things I've read about the PBQP allocator. Given what the hardware folks have to go through to get 1% improvements in scalar code, spending 20% (or whatever) compile time (under control of a flag) seems like nothing. And falling back on "average code" is a little disingenuous. People looking for performance don't care about average code; they care about

The phi instruction is irrelevant; just the way I think about things. The question is if the allocator believes that t0 and t2 interfere. Perhaps the coalescing example was too simple. In the general case, we can't coalesce without a notion of interference. My worry is that looking at interference by ranges of instruction numbers leads to inaccuracies when a range is introduced by a copy.

On Thu, 21 Jun 2018 19:17:14 +0700 Vladimir Eltsov via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hello. > > I have read man smbcontrol. > > I wrote in start message: > > > I have tried: > > systemctl reload smbd.service > > killall -1 smbd > > pkill -HUP smbd Forget 'systemctl reload' Forget 'killall' Forget 'pkill' >

Hi, Using Chaitin's approach, removing a copy via coalescing could expose more opportunities for coalescing. So he would iteratively rebuild the interference graph and check for more opportunities. Chaitin was also careful to make sure that the source and destination of a copy didn't interfere unnecessarily (because of the copy alone); that is, his approach to interference was very

Here's the current code (abstracted a bit) const Instruction *Src, const Instruction *Dst, // make sure they are loads and stores, then const Value *SrcPtr = getPointerOperand(Src); // hides a little casting, then Src->getPointerOperand const Value *DstPtr = getPointerOperand(Dst); // ditto // see how underlying objects alias, then const GEPOperator *SrcGEP =

On 11/02/2012 11:02 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> >> To: "preston briggs" <preston.briggs at gmail.com> >> Cc: "Benjamin Kramer" <benny.kra at gmail.com>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> >> Sent: Friday, November

My problem was that the constructor for DenseMap has an undocumented constraint. explicit DenseMap(unsigned NumInitBuckets = 0) { init(NumInitBuckets); } if given an explicit argument, requires that the argument be a power of 2. It's checked by an assert in init(), but for some reason my code didn't trip the assertion. Is there a special way I must make to enable asserts? Thanks,

Using the following example program #include <math.h> double f(double d){ return sqrt(d); } and compiling it with "clang -O3 ...", I was trying to determine what it would take to get the X86 code generator to replace the call to sqrt with a sqrtsd instruction inline. It turns out that it could do exactly that, were it not for the fact that in the function

When you compile the attached file using llc -march=x86 -mcpu=atom sched-bug.ll -o - The Post-RA scheduler changes the sequence movl %ecx, (%esp) bsfl (%esp),%eax # this came from inline assembly code to read bsfl (%esp),%eax # this came from inline assembly code movl %ecx, (%esp) This is an incorrect schedule, because it seems the scheduler is not aware that the memory

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> > To: "preston briggs" <preston.briggs at gmail.com> > Cc: "Benjamin Kramer" <benny.kra at gmail.com>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, November 2, 2012 12:56:53 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev]

> Only if the recursion is very deep. In practice, a recursive descent > parser isn't going to run out of stack space, nor will a quicksort or > binary-tree walker, The recursive-descent parser case has happened in practice: http://my.opera.com/hallvors/blog/2012/07/17/twitter-crashes-itself-with-commas?1 Also, I've seen some recursion-related PR's in Clang, although I think

I'm experimenting with a new backend, hoping to build a cross compiler, and reading "Writing an LLVM Compiler Backend". Early on, in "Preliminaries", it suggests editing my configure script to add my new target to the TARGETS_TO_BUILD variable, suggesting some creativity may be required. I'm perhaps not creative enough, 'cause I can't get it to work. I tried a