| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Comments:
<0> Dedicated
<0> Server: Root Server I Fedora Core 4 Linux
<0> Lame.
<1> 1and1 is realativly cheap, I've not had them do anything shady, and their customer service is entirely online, and if you want to talk to a person live, well, **** you too.
<0> Eh, not like I get to talk to live people now
<0> They restart my box at 3 am and only have customer service from 9 to 5 or some ****
<1> That's bull****.
<0> AGREED
<2> heh, if I payed for a server, I'd expect 24/7 service.
<3> Does the code that implements Foo::Bar have to be in Foo/Bar.pm? Is there any way of telling perl that it's somewhere else?
<3> depends how much you pay
<1> I've not had any problem with 1and1, nor have any of the people I've referred to them. Myself, I use it just as a place to park a domain and get email, as a friend of mine RUNS a colo facility and just lets me plug in a box.
<3> for $10/mth you can't expect much
<0> ew73: Hook me up with your friend =[
<4> Hooray. The MIDI of Much Work is complete
<0> bluebeard: Yeah, I rather dude.
<0> bluebeard: Er, do.
<2> heh, I have $0/month, so it's all good.
<2> not personal, though.
<0> GreenAsJade: Yes
<3> so ... is this the place where perl questions get answered, or did I somehow warp to an ISP chat?
<0> And why is everyone offering friggin fedore core
<0> GreenAsJade: I JUST ANSWERED YOU. KTHX.
<4> buu: because it's hip!
<2> lol
<1> Oh, poo, I've got to pay 1and1 this next month.
<5> GreenAsJade: it doesn't matter what file you put 'package Foo::Bar;' in
<4> GreenAsJade: It's the place where a bunch of people come to chat, sometimes about perl, and if we feel like answering questions isn't that nice?
<3> oh, thx buu! I didn't realise I asked a yes no question :)
<0> Ick, set up fees.
<0> GreenAsJade: you're welcoem!
<3> (well, I guess I had an "or" in there. so "yes" is a valid answer in any case :) )
<4> GreenAsJade: You can declare a package anywhere you want, but if you expect use/require on Module::Name to work, then you had better have the file be Module/Name.pm
<3> what a bummer :(
<6> well connected friends are nice, except when you're the well connected one who's always being hounded for free hosting
<2> GreenAsJade, why?
<0> caskey: HOOK ME UP MAN
<0> Or something
<0> Maybe I can get a box in high-rez's rack
<0> He's got like twenty billion gigabit
<3> 'cause it doesn
<4> I know you've got the good stuff man. You're holding out on me!
<3> t suit at the moment to have my perl namespace the same as my directory structure
<3> I guess millions live with it, so I have to too:)
<0> !!!! All boxes with Traffic free !!!! 100MB Non-Capped Network Connection / Uplink 1 GB
<0> Rofl.
<2> you could always hack the perl source.
<2> *Perl source.
<0> hobbs: Yeah. That.
<1> After all, it's open source.
<4> actually, no need. You can do clever stuff with @INC hooks
<0> Well, yeah
<0> GreenAsJade: It's a bad idea to not do it =/
<0> GreenAsJade: I mean, you can *use* any directory structure you want
<2> ssshhhh hobbs, that's not discourageing!
<0> You can have Foo::Bar in Cock/****er/Bitch.pm
<2> lol
<1> Hey, could you tie @INC to something?
<0> ew73: !
<0> Like, a train?
<3> How do you tell perl where Cock is?
<5> like .. a bedpost?
<5> gah!
<4> GreenAsJade: well that's the issue ;)
<1> I was thinking something like a BDB hash!
<5> GreenAsJade: require "Cock/****er/Bitch.pm";
<3> sooo ... I figure if the syntax doesn't naturally support it (and I'd just missed it) then it's probably a bad idea
<2> NO! NEVER!
<5> Though the next developer will kill you
<4> GreenAsJade: you learn!
<7> hi
<7> is this command correct?
<7> perl -e 'rename "(.*?)Track(.*?)", "$1Chopin-waltzes$2"' ?
<0> GreenAsJade: You don't need to
<1> moz_: Does it work?
<0> GreenAsJade: Just do: use Cock::****er::Bitch;
<7> no
<3> thx all cyas (netlogistics.com.au hosts my server, fwiw .. very good support)
<3> cheap
<1> Then prolly not.
<0> GreenAsJade: The name you 'use' and the package you declare are completely unrelated.
<2> moz_: I see 2 breasts with a track in the cleavage and nipple rings.
<4> moz_: uh...
<1> (o ) (o )
<0> o.O
<2> I think I need to get laid...
<1> ( o) ( o)
<4> moz_: It looks like you're looking for 'rename', which is a commandline app that USES perl
<1> ( ^ ) ( ^ )
<5> 'use Cock::****er::Bitch' will not import Foo::Bar though as there is no Cock::****er::Bitch::import() function
<1> Oh yeah, baby.
<5> So if you have it in the wrong place, and have an import function, it won't get called automatically by 'use'
<7> hobbs, esaclty
<7> hobbs, exaclty
<4> moz_: okay, then 'man rename'
<1> hobbs: There is a perldoc -f rename too.
<8> rename. To access this perldoc please type, at a command line, 'perldoc -f rename'. You may also find it at http://perldoc.perl.org/functions/rename.html
<4> ew73: which tells you about something entirely different
<1> True.
<1> But it does rename files.
<9> "imMute" at 66.231.16.90 pasted "fork code still not working??" (8 lines, 227B) at http://sial.org/pbot/17382
<0> SERVER OPTIONS
<0> Note: All payments must be made via PayPal for security reasons. PayPal also accepts credit cards.
<0> This horrifies me.
<4> buu: actually it's reasonably sensible. I trust Paypal as a CC processor more than I trust other random sites ;)
<0> hobbs: I certainly don't
<10> in gnu/nix, is there any solution/app to limit cpu and/or memory usage per user (not per application!)?
<11> yes
<10> Khisanth: could you please name it?
<11> ulimit
<0> Khisanth: Tentacles!
<10> Khisanth: ulimit is "per app (belonging to a certain user)", not per user
<0> Argfh ****
<0> Why do all these people use paypal
<11> who?
<10> Khisanth: ulimit is "per [each of the ]apps [belonging to a certain user]", not per user
<11> and you are repeating because?
<4> toany: no it's not
<10> Khisanth: are you asking me?
<10> Khisanth: if so, do you call that a repetition?
<10> hobbs: what is not what?
<4> toany: the thing you repeatedly said. Not true.
<10> hobbs: are you sure you know what you're saying? is it an issue you've ever considered?
<0> Yes?
<4> toany: why yes.
<10> hobbs: then please explain
<0> Heh, if that was per user..
<10> hobbs: ulimit is per app
<4> toany: NO IT ISN'T
<10> hobbs: (belonging to a certain user)
<4> toany: NO IT ISN'T
<10> hobbs: but per what?
<10> buu: if that was per user.. then what?
<4> toany: per (process and all of its children), which if set on a login shell == per session. And you can also limit the number of sessions.
<4> toany: there is no concept of an "app" for anything to be "per app"
<0> toany: IT WOULD BE BAD.
<10> buu: why bad?
<0> toany: Because every process on my box would die.
<0> Yay!
<10> hobbs: every process is an application, depending on how we define that
<10> buu: oh, i thought you were serious :))
<4> toany: we don't define it like that unless we're really stupid
<10> hobbs: well, you many not, but we do.
<10> hobbs: however, what you say is not even roughly equal to having a per user limitation.
<2> I think everyone on a unix-like box should su to root and type "kill -9 0"
<4> toany: except for the part where it imposes a hard per-user limit?
<10> hobbs: let me think
<2> toany: forked processes aren't applications.
<4> bluebeard: isn't that -1? I haven't heard of killing 0
Return to
#perl
or
Go to some related
logs:
kmail could not start process for imap kubuntu
#gentoo
#debian
gdm login bypass gdm.conf
#lisp
pap/ chap peoplepc linux
#css
ubuntu install linux-headers-`uname -r` build-essential
Python book torrent
#debian
|
|