similar to: Problems Adding Workstation to Domain

I've got Samba 2.2.3a running on Debian Linux Kernel 2.4.21 setup as a domain controller. When I try and login to the domain from a Windows XP workstation I get the following message. Windows cannon connect to the domain, either because the domain controller is down or otherwise unavailable, or because your computer account was not found. Can anybody think of what is causing this? Any help

Hello All, Got a little problem that I'm hoping somebody can help me solve. I've got a samba server set as the office's file server. We have a large common share that different people put documents in, and are to be modified by other people. I need to setup samba so that when a new file is created it is writeable to the entire group, not just the person who created it. Here is

I have followed the FAQs and HOW-TOs, including the Sign and Seal registry patch, but I am unable to make this work. RedHat 9.0 Samba 3.0.0rc4 XP Pro SP1 When I setup the PC and join the domain, it gives me the 'Welcome to the Domain' message, but I really don't think that this has worked because of errors in the log file, (yes I can provide, and yes I am using the smb user root).

I've looked through all the doc and searched the list archives, but I just can't seem to get it to work. I have a Linux box with 5 ethernet interfaces, 3 of which have winboxes I'd like to include in my little Samba network. I'm able to get it far enough for each winbox to see the linbox, but they can't see each other. Here's my setup: Winboxes Linbox Win2k -

Hello, I am planning on deploying a few more clients in my lustre environment and was wondering which client version to install. I know it is okay to run a newer client version than your lustre server for upgrade purposes. However, would it be okay to be in this state for a longer period of time (for the life of this filesystem)? My lustre server is currently running 1.8.1.1 on RHEL 5.3 and I

When dtmfmode is set to inband for SIP, and i originate a call from sip out to the PSTN, I can hear the DTMF digit twice in the audio stream. Once very briefly and once for normal duration. Our Theory: While Asterisk is parsing the DTMF, for a fraction of a second, while the end user generated DTMF is being detected, the DTMF is passed inband. Once the DTMF is detected Asterisk silences it

We are running samba on a number of HP systems running HP/UX 11.00. We moved from samba version 2.0.7. to samba version 2.2.3a. We have about 200-400 smbd's running on one host. Samba version 2.2.3a was running without any problems for about two weeks. But now on two different servers indepent of each other, the file table was full. We found out that ONE smbd used about 5000 !!

+ Vedant: what do you think about the last point, since Debugify is also related? Son Tuan Vu On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 6:14 PM, Philip Pfaffe <philip.pfaffe at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Son, > > PassManagerBuilder is used to populate legacy PassManagers. That role is > taken over by PassBuilder for new-PM passes. > > Cheers, > Philip > > 2018-04-18 13:40 GMT+02:00

Hi Philip, I forgot to mention that I was ignoring loop-independent dependences. If I don't I get an inconsistent, ordered, anti, loop-independent dependence and an inconsistent, ordered, flow, loop-carried dependence for example A. At the same time I get just a consistent, ordered, anti, loop-independent dependence for example B. Here's the .ll code for example A: *; Function Attrs:

> On Apr 20, 2018, at 1:46 PM, Son Tuan VU <sontuan.vu119 at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Vedant, > > Thanks for your reply. More comments inline. > > Son Tuan Vu > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:19 PM, Vedant Kumar <vsk at apple.com <mailto:vsk at apple.com>> wrote: > Hi, > > + Chandler, who has a lot more experience with our pass managers.

Hi Son, PassManagerBuilder is used to populate legacy PassManagers. That role is taken over by PassBuilder for new-PM passes. Cheers, Philip 2018-04-18 13:40 GMT+02:00 Son Tuan VU <sontuan.vu119 at gmail.com>: > Hi Philip, > > Thank you for your reply. So what would be the right way/API to write > out-of-tree pass? I've been using *PassManagerBuilder*, which requires a

Hi, + Chandler, who has a lot more experience with our pass managers. > On Apr 20, 2018, at 12:56 PM, Son Tuan VU <sontuan.vu119 at gmail.com> wrote: > > + Vedant: what do you think about the last point, since Debugify is also related? Could you clarify the question? I'm not sure what it is you'd like me to chime in about. > 2, I've asked this question once but

We're using RMAN to back up our 9.2 RAC database to an OCFS v1 volume. We have an existing shell script that we use for copying files from disk to tape via tar, one file at a time. (Don't ask why. It's a legacy script. Long story.) We're tweaking this script to use --o_direct when tarring the file to tape and that seems to be working fine: # tape device is /dev/nst0 $ tar

On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Thanks for the explanation. I'm used to hearing the term "stack banging" > used for this mechanism, but I understand your objective. > > I believe having a general mechanism here would be valuable, but only if > the implementation doesn't make assumptions about runtime

Seem to be getting a problem when running a feature with background. Running the whole file works fine however running an individual feature fails. The background steps are Background: Given an admin user Philip exists When I login as Philip Then I should be logged in as Philip running the following scenario on its own causes an error Scenario: Admin should be able to run a feed #

Hi Philip, Thank you for your reply. So what would be the right way/API to write out-of-tree pass? I've been using *PassManagerBuilder*, which requires a callback refering to *legacy::PassManagerBase*, so I guess this will be no longer the good way to go? Son Tuan Vu On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 6:06 PM, Philip Pfaffe <philip.pfaffe at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Son, > > I have an

Hi Vedant, Thanks for your reply. More comments inline. Son Tuan Vu On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:19 PM, Vedant Kumar <vsk at apple.com> wrote: > Hi, > > + Chandler, who has a lot more experience with our pass managers. > > On Apr 20, 2018, at 12:56 PM, Son Tuan VU <sontuan.vu119 at gmail.com> wrote: > > + Vedant: what do you think about the last point, since

Personally I would use TOT. Obviously my 2 cents Garrison On Sep 19, 2011, at 12:54, Philip Reames wrote: > Good morning, > > What is the general consensus about using LLVM 2.9 vs tip of tree for > developing new backends? Is LLVM 2.9 still recent enough to make > forward porting easy once 3.0 comes out? Is tip of tree considered > stable enough for non-core

I'm concerned about codegen. If Codegen is not yet ready for the new PM, should the new PM really become default? I would at least like to see a plan of how Codegen is going to migrate before the new PM becomes default. Codegen pass pipelines have been wonky ever since I started working with LLVM and it would be nice to get that cleaned up. -David Philip Pfaffe

The point of this is to cheaply detect all stack overflows using a guard page. For a guard page to actually detect all stack overflows, we need to ensure that the code touches each page of the stack in the right order, otherwise it could skip the guard page and write outside the stack. That is very bad for languages such as Rust which provides memory safety, so it currently does an explicit