| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Comments:
<0> well
<0> install PEAR using "yum" then
<0> yum is what you use to install things in fedora
<0> and everything sorts itself out
<1> Damn.. was follwing a tutorial which messed me up.
<2> Jostein: I will be dragging you out for a walk today..
<2> sun is shining, sky is blue..
<1> But the ice is slippery
<1> anyway.. you say there is a package manager for PEAR?
<2> man kristianf@alpha ~ $ pear version
<2> PEAR Version: 1.4.6
<3> does anybody know of an ssh client with source code ?
<2> eh
<4> hey. Small question about kernel versions. I understand from http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ that the latest is 2.6.19, what's the difference between that and 2.6.9 ? my system says 2.6.9-42.EL. is that the same sa .19 ?
<4> s/sa/as
<2> rofl
<2> no 9 != 19, besides latest is 2.6.19.2
<4> K_F: hehe, I thought .9 is newer.. I got it now, .9 .10 .11 .12 .... .19.2 = latest
<2> Dual2003: yeah. it is not, nor was it ever intended to be compared to the decimal system, besides, how many mathematicians do you know using 3-4 decimal positions :)
<4> funny
<4> z
<4> oops
<4> thanks
<4> bye
<1> ok.. maybe it doesn't work.. now installed.. am getting error in my error log
<5> 2.6.20 should be out RSN
<5> though rc5 was supposed to be the release, now it's into rc7
<2> Nanuq: better to have something stable than to rush it for the sake of it
<5> K_F: well, Linux is inherently flawed and perpetually unstable ;)
<2> Nanuq: what you have the bugfix releases as .y
<2> Nanuq: stable enough for me :)
<4> Vista is the best !!!
<4> pffft
<1> no errors.. but no spreadsheet either
<6> heya guys
<2> buongiorno
<6> come stai?
<2> sto bene, grazie
<2> but think we'll keep it in English in here :)
<6> so...I got a problem with gdb as i never used it..anyone here who uses ddd regularly ?
<2> not really..
<6> or any other debugger
<6> just need to debug my software somehow :P
<2> whenever I use gdb I use it directly
<6> hmm....ok
<6> because all the tutorials out there are just with 1 small file
<6> how do i debug if i have a project with several files
<6> i included the source file path of the directory...but then gdb just says i have to wait until gdb is ready which takes infinitely long
<6> btw...is it correct that i add the -g flag at every .cpp -> .o conversion in the makefile?
<5> nundi: rewrite your makefile to make use of CXXFLAGS, like everything else
<6> hmm..in the makefile there are already CPPFLAGS
<6> so i just add a -g in that macro, right=
<6> ?
<6> the problem i have in ddd is that i can't jump to a other file...always says it doesnt find that member
<6> must i add anything else than the directory to the source path in the GDB settings?
<6> heya
<2> heya Lion-O
<7> K_F: m00
<7> aaah. brilliantly wasted my entire morning by doing nothing but lying in bed, watching tv and messing with the ipaq. Live is good ;)
<6> hrhr
<2> hehe
<6> damn...am i the only one always getting cold feet here
<6> winter suxx
<7> hmm, 100 spam messages. How nice.
<6> hey lion...have u got debugging experience?
<2> Lion-O: thats not too much
<7> "you". Depends on what is being debugged :)
<2> apparently I got 581 spam messages yesterday
<7> K_F: naah. Knowing myself (its not my turn to cook) I'll be checking up on the company servers later this evening whilst enjoying a beer and some music or videos ;)
<7> oh wait; 100 spams.. yeah, I tend to change email addies every now and then.
<2> nah, I don't bother with that, but let SPF and SA do its job
<6> just got a small project with some source files spread in some folders....now i'm on ddd and trying to debug stuff bug i can't jump between different source files...it says it doesnt find them....but i added the source files in the search path of the GDB settings
<6> as its the first time i'm dealing with gdb it might be that i might have missed an option i should have set on top of that...maybe you got an idea
<6> ah yes...if i include all the source folders gdb kinda hungs up...it says i have to wait until gdb is ready...which never happens
<2> Lion-O: http://www2.kfwebs.net/spam0702.png
<2> guess which period I was overworked :p
<7> K_F: lol
<7> 22/3/2006 ;) When the real mail is in good harmony with the spam :P
<7> K_F: interesting chart
<2> I'm a statistics junkie, keeps stats of everything.
<5> K_F: looks like a higher percentage of email is being flagged as spam, but at the end of the day, more than six months ago
<5> K_F: actually recent stats look much less correlated than prior. new anti-spam?
<2> Nanuq: there are continuous improvements to the filtering, but I got an insane amount of emails for a while
<5> K_F: ever since I put my foot down wrt spam, I'm getting maybe two a day
<5> K_F: vs 60
<2> Nanuq: yeah, it is filtered out by the system, so I don't _see_ it
<2> but I _get_ it
<5> K_F: I don't even get it ;)
<5> K_F: they get *click*, I get nothing ;)
<2> sure you do, the system just filters it out for you
<5> K_F: RBL ;)
<2> anyways, just scemantics :)
<2> Nanuq: I like SPF too
<5> K_F: yeah, but the message never actually gets over the wire
<5> K_F: which is important, considering it's my personal link
<2> fair enough
<2> Nanuq: anyways, if only some idiots managed to protect their systems so we wouldn't get them in the first place :)
<2> not to mention the imbeciles purchasing stuff from it
<5> K_F: aye
<5> K_F: this is why I have faith in RBLs. I don't want to ***ociate with you if you can't manage such things, or find an ISP that can.
<2> jup
<2> Nanuq: my ISP here blocks outgoing port 25
<5> K_F: no excuse since you can use gmail, say
<2> I have ambivalent feelings about it, but as of now I'm positive..
<5> K_F: about?
<2> isp blocking outgoing 25
<5> K_F: static IP?
<2> well, you're thinking of incoming 25, if I was to use this place as a mailserver
<5> K_F: no, I'm asking if your IP is static.
<5> K_F: I know what I ask.
<2> yeah, I have some static IPs around
<5> K_F: can your ISP make an exception?
<2> don't need to, I just use another port on my server, which isn't really an issue to use SSL in the first place.
<5> K_F: if it were up to me, I'd allow it. second I get complaints of spam from $user, you're OUT.
<2> nah, I actually like them being proactive
<5> K_F: dynamic is another story.
<8> Nanuq i'm rather for the opposite, block unless somebody explicitely asks
<5> K_F: though I suppose you can open and close it per-user, but why? use your ISP's MTA.
<2> tojoe: jup
<5> tojoe: isn't that what I said?
<8> i understood you want to allow it by default and just block it when issues arise
<5> tojoe: He says his ISP blocks port 25. I'd do that by default.
<5> tojoe: Nono.
<8> ah, ok
<5> tojoe: But if someone asks, I'd give 'em a chance.
<9> BIG PARTY
<9> :o)
<5> tojoe: If they blow it, they're gone.
<2> Nanuq: I prefer to use my own MTAs :) but I just connect on the SSL port instead of 25, no problem
<5> cheeksy
<9> Eric :o)))))
<2> heya cheeksy
<9> K_F :o))))
<5> K_F: I don't believe in SSL for SMTP.
<5> K_F: For me it has to be end to end encrypted. There's zero benefit to encrypting it part of the way.
<2> Nanuq: not for security except p***word exchange
<2> Nanuq: but you know I'm an OpenPGP freak already :)
<5> K_F: Well okay there might be benefit under some circumstances. But, if your goal is secrecy, that isn't the way.
<7> Nanuq: new brina' strips! :)
<5> Lion-O: oh **** yeah
<5> Lion-O: two things I love at the end of the month: interest, Sabrina Online ;)
<7> Nanuq: I liked them, they're quite funny 8)
<9> Simba!
<7> cheeksy: my, its the gorgeous queen of China :-)
<7> cheeksy: hi there
<9> aahhh my niece is soooooooooo cute!
<9> i dont know though why she looks almost exactly like me when i was her age
Return to
#linux
or
Go to some related
logs:
#teens
lezbiana
superfaco
#MissKitten
error C2602: std::
#chatzone
shoutcasttv
04elsa
#AllNiteCafe
il-mohriet
|
|
