Search Results

Search found 11246 results on 450 pages for 'power supply unit'.

Page 2/450 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Reduce power consumption of gaming computer while idle

  - by White Phoenix

  This is my current build: EVGA X58 (first generation) motherboard Intel i7 965 clocked @ 3.3 Ghz 3x DDR3-1600 Corsair RAM at stock timings and voltages Corsair AX750 80 Plus Gold PSU 1 Optical Drive 1 Seagate 7200.10 500 GB drive 2x Western Digital Caviar Black 1 TB drives OCZ Vertex 1 60 GB EVGA GTX 460 oc'd at 800/1600/1850 Antec 1200 case HT-Omega Striker 7.1 Sound Card Windows 7 32-bit Professional (PAE Enabled) I've already seen this post Reduce power use on computer and this post How do I lower power consumption of my computer and while useful, I'm looking for answers specific to my build and OS. I'm pretty sure this build is a energy-intensive build by default, but I want to try to reduce the amount of energy my build uses when I leave it idle (when I go to bed or go out, etc). The first requirement for this machine is that I need to leave it on, so I cannot turn it off while it's being unused. I run it as a file server for personal reasons and I also leave it on in case people leave me messages on various IM services and chat clients (IRC, MSN, Steam, XFire, Pidgin, etc). I'm also unable to replace the parts in my computer with a cheaper "greener" part. What are some ways to minimize the amount of power the machine uses? I'm already using a high efficiency power supply (80 Plus Gold), but I imagine there's other things that can be done in the BIOS and Windows' power settings to reduce power usage while I'm not using the computer. From what I can tell, I can't use Sleep since that'll disable network access (whole reason why I leave the computer on in the first place). I already turn off my monitor when it's not in use. I enabled Intel SpeedStep within the BIOS (I know, I have a 965 and why am I enabling SpeedStep?) Should I bring the graphics card back to stock speeds and lower the clock on the processor even more? Main reason why I'm asking is I think this computer alone is the reason why my power bill is high, so I want to reduce its consumption to as low as possible without having to shut the thing down.

  Read the article

• UPS and power strip interactions?

  - by chaos

  Sometimes I hear that you shouldn't plug (UPS brand X / any UPS) into (power strip brand X / any power strip) because of some interaction leading to poorly conditioned power, reduced battery life, massive explosions spattering the room with battery acid, and so on. Sometimes I hear that it's the power strip that you shouldn't plug into the UPS. What I haven't gotten is a clear idea of how reliable these recommendations are or how generally/specifically they apply. Can anyone speak precisely and non-urban-legendfully on these UPS and power strip interactions, if there are in fact ones worth thinking about?

  Read the article

• Are "TDD Tests" different to Unit Tests?

  - by asgeo1

  I read this article about TDD and unit testing: http://stephenwalther.com/blog/archive/2009/04/11/tdd-tests-are-not-unit-tests.aspx I think it was an excellent article. The author makes a distinction between what he calls "TDD Tests" and unit testing. They appear to be different tests to him. Previous to reading this article I thought unit tests were a by-product of TDD. I didn't realise you might also create "TDD tests". The author seems to imply that creating unit tests is not enough for TDD as the granularity of a unit test is too small for what we are trying to achieve with TDD. So his TDD tests might test a few classes at once. At the end of the article there is some discussion from the author with some other people about whether there really is a distinction between "TDD Tests" and unit testing. Seems to be some contention around this idea. The example "TDD tests" the author showed at the end of the article just looked like normal MVC unit tests to me - perhaps "TDD tests" vs unit tests is just a matter of semantics? I would like to hear some more opinions on this, and whether there is / isn't a distinction between the two tests.

  Read the article

• Do Repeat Yourself in Unit Tests

  - by João Angelo

  Don’t get me wrong I’m a big supporter of the DRY (Don’t Repeat Yourself) Principle except however when it comes to unit tests. Why? Well, in my opinion a unit test should be a self-contained group of actions with the intent to test a very specific piece of code and should not depend on externals shared with other unit tests. In a typical unit test we can divide its code in two major groups: Preparation of preconditions for the code under test; Invocation of the code under test. It’s in the first group that you are tempted to refactor common code in several unit tests into helper methods that can then be called in each one of them. Another way to not duplicate code is to use the built-in infrastructure of some unit test frameworks such as SetUp/TearDown methods that automatically run before and after each unit test. I must admit that in the past I was guilty of both charges but what at first seemed a good idea since I was removing code duplication turnout to offer no added value and even complicate the process when a given test fails. We love unit tests because of their rapid feedback when something goes wrong. However, this feedback requires most of the times reading the code for the failed test. Given this, what do you prefer? To read a single method or wander through several methods like SetUp/TearDown and private common methods. I say it again, do repeat yourself in unit tests. It may feel wrong at first but I bet you won’t regret it later.

  Read the article

• Unit testing statically typed functional code

  - by back2dos

  I wanted to ask you people, in which cases it makes sense to unit test statically typed functional code, as written in haskell, scala, ocaml, nemerle, f# or haXe (the last is what I am really interested in, but I wanted to tap into the knowledge of the bigger communities). I ask this because from my understanding: One aspect of unit tests is to have the specs in runnable form. However when employing a declarative style, that directly maps the formalized specs to language semantics, is it even actually possible to express the specs in runnable form in a separate way, that adds value? The more obvious aspect of unit tests is to track down errors that cannot be revealed through static analysis. Given that type safe functional code is a good tool to code extremely close to what your static analyzer understands. However a simple mistake like using x instead of y (both being coordinates) in your code cannot be covered. However such a mistake could also arise while writing the test code, so I am not sure whether its worth the effort. Unit tests do introduce redundancy, which means that when requirements change, the code implementing them and the tests covering this code must both be changed. This overhead of course is about constant, so one could argue, that it doesn't really matter. In fact, in languages like Ruby it really doesn't compared to the benefits, but given how statically typed functional programming covers a lot of the ground unit tests are intended for, it feels like it's a constant overhead one can simply reduce without penalty. From this I'd deduce that unit tests are somewhat obsolete in this programming style. Of course such a claim can only lead to religious wars, so let me boil this down to a simple question: When you use such a programming style, to which extents do you use unit tests and why (what quality is it you hope to gain for your code)? Or the other way round: do you have criteria by which you can qualify a unit of statically typed functional code as covered by the static analyzer and hence needs no unit test coverage?

  Read the article

• Unit and Integration testing: How can it become a reflex

  - by LordOfThePigs

  All the programmers in my team are familiar with unit testing and integration testing. We have all worked with it. We have all written tests with it. Some of us even have felt an improved sense of trust in his/her own code. However, for some reason, writing unit/integration tests has not become a reflex for any of the members of the team. None of us actually feel bad when not writing unit tests at the same time as the actual code. As a result, our codebase is mostly uncovered by unit tests, and projects enter production untested. The problem with that, of course is that once your projects are in production and are already working well, it is virtually impossible to obtain time and/or budget to add unit/integration testing. The members of my team and myself are already familiar with the value of unit testing (1, 2) but it doesn't seem to help bringing unit testing into our natural workflow. In my experience making unit tests and/or a target coverage mandatory just results in poor quality tests and slows down team members simply because there is no self-generated motivation to produce these tests. Also as soon as pressure eases, unit tests are not written any more. My question is the following: Is there any methods that you have experimented with that helps build a dynamic/momentum inside the team, leading to people naturally wanting to create and maintain those tests?

  Read the article

• What is the objective of unit testing?

  - by user728750

  I've been working with C# for the last 2 years, and I've never done any unit testing. I just need to know what the objective of unit testing is. What kind of results do we expect from unit testing? Is code quality checked by unit testing? In my view, unit testing is the job of testers; if that is true, then as a developer why would I need to write test code if the tester does the unit testing? Why should I write extra code for testing? Do I need to maintain a separate copy of a project for unit testing?

  Read the article

• Monitor won't enter power save mode

  - by Adam Monsen

  My LCD monitor won't enter power save mode. I've gone into System ? Preferences ? Screensaver, clicked Power Management, then set Put display to sleep when inactive for: to 10 minutes (for both On AC Power and On Battery Power), but the monitor still doesn't enter power save mode, even after an hour. Anyone have ideas on what to try? I'm using Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS 64-bit desktop on a Dell Latitude E6400 laptop.

  Read the article

• New Supply Chain, S&OP, & TPM Analyst Reports from Gartner, IDC Now Available

  - by Mike Liebson

  Check out these analyst reports Oracle has recently made available for customers and partners on Oracle.com: Gartner:  MarketScope for Stage 3 Sales and Operations Planning  -  Gartner lead supply chain planning analyst, Tim Payne, discusses the evolving definition of S&OP, the Gartner S&OP maturity model, and recommendations for selecting S&OP technology solutions. Gartner: Vendor Panorama for Trade Promotion Management in Consumer Goods  -  Consumer goods analyst, Dale Hagemeyer, presents an overview of the TPM market, followed by an analysis of vendor offerings. IDC:  Perspective: Oracle OpenWorld 2012 — Supply Chain as a Focus  -  Supply chain analyst, Simon Ellis, discusses supply chain highlights from the October OpenWorld conference. Value Chain Planning highlights include the VCP product roadmap and demand sensing presentations by Electronic Arts (Demantra) and Sony (Demand Signal Repository). For a complete set of analyst reports, visit here.

  Read the article

• How to calculate power/energy taken by computer and screen

  - by r0ca

  I need to investigate how much power my linux machine uses per week. I can take a look at the PSU but I would like to know how to calculate the average use of power it takes. I also need to know how much power a CRT screen use per week. Do I need to check the PSU Watt unit and Screen Watt usage and just add both to have the results? P.S. My english is not good, sorry about that! P.P.S. My question is not related to: http://superuser.com/questions/9946/how-to-choose-a-ups-calculate-power-for-a-new-pc

  Read the article

• Software to measure power draw of HP Server

  - by tombull89

  I'm after some software to measure the power draw of a HP Server, namely a DL360 series. I know Nagios is used for logging and monitering but I'm not sure if it logs power usage as well. I've also tried to find the HP Server Management package but am not sure if this shows power usage either. I'm thinking my best bet would to buy some sort of device that goes inbetween the wall and the servers plug. Can anybody suggest what would do for me?

  Read the article

• What is a good open source software to manage my Tripp-lite UPS (Uninterruptible power supply)

  - by Beatle

  I have a Tripp-Lite Smart150rmxl2ua UPS. The software from their website doesn't seem to work properly. I also tried "apcupsd" which is an open source software which i am supposed to be able to use to manage my UPS and I had no luck with that either since Windows 7 did not want to install and use the drivers since they are "incompatible". Is there another good working open source software out there? It sucks that Tripp-Lite doesn't supply its customers with working software.

  Read the article

• Is unit testing development or testing?

  - by Rubio

  I had a discussion with a testing manager about the role of unit and integration testing. She requested that developers report what they have unit and integration tested and how. My perspective is that unit and integration testing are part of the development process, not the testing process. Beyond semantics what I mean is that unit and integration tests should not be included in the testing reports and systems testers should not be concerned about them. My reasoning is based on two things. Unit and integration tests are planned and performed against an interface and a contract, always. Regardless of whether you use formalized contracts you still test what e.g. a method is supposed to do, i.e. a contract. In integration testing you test the interface between two distinct modules. The interface and the contract determine when the test passes. But you always test a limited part of the whole system. Systems testing on the other hand is planned and performed against the system specifications. The spec determines when the test passes. I don't see any value in communicating the breadth and depth of unit and integration tests to the (systems) tester. Suppose I write a report that lists what kind of unit tests are performed on a particular business layer class. What is he/she supposed to take away from that? Judging what should and shouldn't be tested from that is a false conclusion because the system may still not function the way the specs require even though all unit and integration tests pass. This might seem like useless academic discussion but if you work in a strictly formal environment as I do, it's actually important in determining how we do things. Anyway, am I totally wrong? (Sorry for the long post.)

  Read the article

• Does unit testing lead to premature generalization (specifically in the context of C++)?

  - by Martin

  Preliminary notes I'll not go into the distinction of the different kinds of test there are, there are already a few questions on these sites regarding that. I'll take what's there and that says: unit testing in the sense of "testing the smallest isolatable unit of an application" from which this question actually derives The isolation problem What is the smallest isolatable unit of a program. Well, as I see it, it (highly?) depends on what language you are coding in. Micheal Feathers talks about the concept of a seam: [WEwLC, p31] A seam is a place where you can alter behavior in your program without editing in that place. And without going into the details, I understand a seam -- in the context of unit testing -- to be a place in a program where your "test" can interface with your "unit". Examples Unit test -- especially in C++ -- require from the code under test to add more seams that would be strictly called for for a given problem. Example: Adding a virtual interface where non-virtual implementation would have been sufficient Splitting -- generalizing(?) -- a (smallish) class further "just" to facilitate adding a test. Splitting a single-executable project into seemingly "independent" libs, "just" to facilitate compiling them independently for the tests. The question I'll try a few versions that hopefully ask about the same point: Is the way that Unit Tests require one to structure an application's code "only" beneficial for the unit tests or is it actually beneficial to the applications structure. Is the generalization code need to exhibit to be unit-testable useful for anything but the unit tests? Does adding unit tests force one to generalize unnecessarily? Is the shape unit tests force on code "always" also a good shape for the code in general as seen from the problem domain? I remember a rule of thumb that said don't generalize until you need to / until there's a second place that uses the code. With Unit Tests, there's always a second place that uses the code -- namely the unit test. So is this reason enough to generalize?

  Read the article

• Change power button to 'Ask' in Xubuntu 13.10

  - by Gully.Moy

  I have recently installed Xubuntu 13.10 on my Vaio vpcea making me a Linux beginner. The problem is that laptop's power button is right on the edge of the bezel making it far too easy to press accidentally, in my opinion a design fault by Sony. At present, when I press the power button it shuts down strait away and as you can imagine, when I'm accidentally pressing it all the time it gets very annoying! So I planned to change it to ask what I would like to do when I press it or at least ask if I'm sure. So I went through the xfce GUI options "Settings Manager" - "Power Manager" to the field "When power button is pressed", but it was already set to "Ask". So I did some digging and found a thread telling me to navigate to /etc/xdg/xfce4/xfconf/xfce-perchannel-xml/xfce4-power-manager.xml where it said to find power-button-action and check that value="3". It already did. So I looked some more and found this thread which focuses on acpi scripts. I tried solution 1 & 2 using sudoedit to change the files accordingly (I have made executable bash shell scripts already so I think I followed them correctly), but still no difference. I also found this thread which instructed me to edit /etc/systemd/logind.conf so that HandlePowerKey=ignore. Still no luck. I even tried my own approach to completely disable /etc/acpi/powerbtn.sh by renaming it powerbtn.sh.bak hoping for at least no response from the power button... and I have done many reboots in between... but still it shuts down! I have also read that some people have the file /etc/acpi/events/power_button, but I do not. So does anyone have any other ideas? What else could be executing the shutdown sequence Is there something I'm missing? I haven't undone any of these actions so every one of the above files is currently edited on my computer, with the exception that "Solution 2" automatically undone "Solution 1" above. Thanks guys.

  Read the article

• Oracle Number One in Supply Chain Planning

  - by Stephen Slade

  Something nice to write home about!  Saw this accomplishment and worth promoting, with special Congrats to the VCP team. Read on: Summary: Oracle is the #1 player in  Supply Chain Planning  according to research firm ARC Advisory Group Details: The report (Source: ARC Advisory Group, “Supply Chain Planning Worldwide Outlook, Market Analysis and Forecast through 2016,” Clint Reiser, Steve Banker), gives Oracle 21.1% of revenue share, compared to SAP, who was second at 18.6%. JDA Software, Aspen, Logility, and Infor were the next players in the market. The total market was valued at $1.506B. ARC counts Software (new license and upgrades), Implementation Services, Maintenance and Support, and SaaS, in its definition. ARC defines supply chain planning to include four key application areas: Extended SCP, Manufacturing Planning, Inventory/Distribution Planning, and Demand Management. Extended SCP consists of Network Design, Capable to Promise, SCP Composites, and Extended Supply Chain BI software. In the report, ARC further gives Oracle the number one spot in both Software Revenues and Services Revenues subsegments, as well as in many vertical areas such as Government, Electronics and Electrical, Medical Products, Pharmaceutical, and Wholesale/Distribution. ARC also issued a forecast, that predicts SCP revenue to grow from $1.506B in 2011 to $2.172B in 2016, with a CAGR of 7.6%. The report has several positive quotes about Oracle, including calling Oracle a “visionary,” and states that “Oracle has leveraged a broad set of home-grown and acquired offerings to create a comprehensive, integrated, yet modular suite with applicability to a wide range of industries,” Blog Link: http://blog.us.oracle.com/marketdata/?97119896  (shawn willett@oracle com)

  Read the article

• Power management on Android -- is app CPU correlated to power usage? [closed]

  - by foampile

  2 questions: Is application CPU usage on Android correlated and how highly to battery usage? In other words, are apps that suck a lot of CPU also draining the battery or not necessarily? Is there a way to itemize and display the phone's power use by application, at any given point in time as well as within defined time buckets and maybe view charts and such? Sort of like a diagnostic monitor for power usage by application or system component? Thanks

  Read the article

• Automated unit testing, integration testing or acceptance testing

  - by bjarkef

  TDD and unit testing seems to be the big rave at the moment. But it is really that useful compared to other forms of automated testing? Intuitively I would guess that automated integration testing is way more useful than unit testing. In my experience the most bugs seems to be in the interaction between modules, and not so much the actual (usual limited) logic of each unit. Also regressions often happened because of changing interfaces between modules (and changed pre and post-conditions.) Am I misunderstanding something, or why are unit testing getting so much focus compared to integration testing? It is simply because it is assumed that integration testing is something you have, and unit testing is the next thing we need to learn to apply as developers? Or maybe unit testing simply yields the highest gain compared to the complexity of automating it? What are you experience with automated unit testing, automated integration testing, and automated acceptance testing, and in your experience what has yielded the highest ROI? and why? If you had to pick just one form of testing to be automated on your next project, which would it be? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Supply Chain Professionals: Get Connected, Stay Current

  - by Stephen Slade

  Each day, thousands of supply chain professionals like you face challenges to lower inventory, collaborate better with distant partners and stretch the value from depleting resources.  Meeting ever-changing customer demands, with products getting to market faster and lifecycles shortning, the challenges grow even faster.  How do we respond? It’s amazing how much material is available on-line for our supply chain community. Many want to stay informed and be connected with better information. One great way to stay current on rapidly changing markets and solutions is to subscribe to the Value Chain Transformation newsletter published quarterly by the content staff at Oracle. In this edition, there’s a few great articles on Cloud, OpenWorld, events and products with solid customer testimony to share with you, our supply chain community.  Below is the link to the newsletter and how to subscribe Sept ‘12 Value Chain Newsletter: http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/newsletter/archive/value-chain-and-procurement-1559127.html Subscription information is located at the bottom of the newsletter.

  Read the article

• NVIDIA Tesla K20C in Dell PowerEdge R720xd --- power cables

  - by CptSupermrkt

  I am trying to put an NVIDIA Tesla K20C into a Dell PowerEdge R720xd. I'm having a bit of trouble understanding the power requirements of the card. First, here is a picture of two pages of the same manual, which seems contradictory to me. One page says only a single connector is required, while the next page says both are required. The entire manual for the card can be found here: http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/kepler/Tesla-K20-Active-BD-06499-001-v02.pdf Here is an photo taken of the power connections on the card: And here is a photo of where those connectors need to go, onto the PCI-E riser of the r720xd: Neither the R720xd NOR the GPU came with the necessary cables. And given what appears to be a contradiction in the GPU manual (above), I'm not even sure at this point what we actually need. I have searched high and low online for things like 2x6 pin PCI-E to 8 pin male-to-male and so on, and for the life of me cannot find what we need. In case anyone needs it, the owner's manual of the R720xd can be found here: ftp://ftp.dell.com/Manuals/all-products/esuprt_ser_stor_net/esuprt_poweredge/poweredge-r720xd_Owner%27s%20Manual_en-us.pdf The relevant page is page 68, which clearly indicates that the 8-pin female port on the riser card is for a GPU. The bottom line question: exactly what power cables do we need to buy, and where can we find them?

  Read the article

• CppUnit for unit-testing executable files?

  - by hagubear

  I am not sure if anyone has done it. I am trying to do something that is in general, uncommon i.e. unit-testing executable (Windows) or ELFs (Linux). I know that CppUnit provides a good unit testing facility, but I have never used it for unit-testing (used UnitTest++). I hear rumours that you can unit-test executables too. Does anyone have the experience in this? A relevant post regarding the philosophy of it was here

  Read the article

• Power adapter is not seen in Ubuntu 11.10

  - by Jammanuser

  I have an Alienware M17xR3 laptop running Ubuntu 11.10, and there is an issue with my power adapter when it is plugged in after OS has already loaded (i.e. when I unplug it when at Ubuntu's desktop, and then replug it in again). The problem is Ubuntu thinks its still running on battery power, and that the battery is discharging, and does not recognize my power adapter plugged in. Note that when the power adapter is plugged in when Ubuntu loads up, there is no issue though. It sees the power adapter just fine. So what can be done to solve this problem? Thanks in advance for any help.

  Read the article

• The Power to Control Power

  - by speakjava

  I'm currently working on a number of projects using embedded Java on the Raspberry Pi and Beagle Board.  These are nice and small, so don't take up much room on my desk as you can see in this picture. As you can also see I have power and network connections emerging from under my desk.  One of the (admittedly very minor) drawbacks of these systems is that they have no on/off switch.  Instead you insert or remove the power connector (USB for the RasPi, a barrel connector for the Beagle).  For the Beagle Board this can potentially be an issue; with the micro-SD card located right next to the connector it has been known for people to eject the card when trying to power off the board, which can be quite serious for the hardware. The alternative is obviously to leave the boards plugged in and then disconnect the power from the outlet.  Simple enough, but a picture of underneath my desk shows that this is not the ideal situation either. This made me think that it would be great if I could have some way of controlling a mains voltage outlet using a remote switch or, even better, from software via a USB connector.  A search revealed not much that fit my requirements, and anything that was close seemed very expensive.  Obviously the only way to solve this was to build my own.Here's my solution.  I decided my system would support both control mechanisms (remote physical switch and USB computer control) and be modular in its design for optimum flexibility.  I did a bit of searching and found a company in Hong Kong that were offering solid state relays for 99p plus shipping (£2.99, but still made the total price very reasonable).  These would handle up to 380V AC on the output side so more than capable of coping with the UK 240V supply.  The other great thing was that being solid state, the input would work with a range of 3-32V and required a very low current of 7.5mA at 12V.  For the USB control an Arduino board seemed the obvious low-cost and simple choice.  Given the current requirments of the relay, the Arduino would not require the additional power supply and could be powered just from the USB.Having secured the relays I popped down to Homebase for a couple of 13A sockets, RS for a box and an Arduino and Maplin for a toggle switch.  The circuit is pretty straightforward, as shown in the diagram (only one output is shown to make it as simple as possible).  Originally I used a 2 pole toggle switch to select the remote switch or USB control by switching the negative connections of the low voltage side.  Unfortunately, the resistance between the digital pins of the Arduino board was not high enough, so when using one of the remote switches it would turn on both of the outlets.  I changed to a 4 pole switch and isolated both positive and negative connections. IMPORTANT NOTE: If you want to follow my design, please be aware that it requires working with mains voltages.  If you are at all concerned with your ability to do this please consult a qualified electrician to help you.It was a tight fit, especially getting the Arduino in, but in the end it all worked.  The completed box is shown in the photos. The remote switch was pretty simple just requiring the squeezing of two rocker switches and a 9V battery into the small RS supplied box.  I repurposed a standard stereo cable with phono plugs to connect the switch box to the mains outlets.  I chopped off one set of plugs and wired it to the rocker switches.  The photo shows the RasPi and the Beagle board now controllable from the switch box on the desk. I've tested the Arduino side of things and this works fine.  Next I need to write some software to provide an interface for control of the outlets.  I'm thinking a JavaFX GUI would be in keeping with the total overkill style of this project.

  Read the article

• External Monitors shut off when Laptop Lid closes

  - by John Lanz

  I have researched the solution... gconftool-2 --type string --set /apps/gnome-power-manager/buttons/lid_ac "nothing" does not fix it. I have two external monitors and when I close my lid the settings are reset and the laptop's monitor is set to the default. Thanks! gsettings list-recursively org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power active true org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power button-hibernate 'nothing' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power button-power 'nothing' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power button-sleep 'nothing' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power button-suspend 'nothing' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power critical-battery-action 'suspend' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power idle-brightness 30 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power idle-dim-ac false org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power idle-dim-battery true org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power idle-dim-time 10 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power lid-close-ac-action 'nothing' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power lid-close-battery-action 'nothing' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power notify-perhaps-recall true org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power percentage-action 2 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power percentage-critical 3 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power percentage-low 10 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power priority 1 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power sleep-display-ac 600 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power sleep-display-battery 600 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power sleep-inactive-ac false org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power sleep-inactive-ac-timeout 0 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power sleep-inactive-ac-type 'suspend' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power sleep-inactive-battery true org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power sleep-inactive-battery-timeout 0 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power sleep-inactive-battery-type 'suspend' org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power time-action 120 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power time-critical 300 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power time-low 1200 org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power use-time-for-policy true

  Read the article

• Should I demand unit-testing from programmers?

  - by Morten

  I work at a place, where we buy a lot of IT-projects. We are currently producing a standard for systems-requirements for the requisition of future projects. In that process, We are discussing whether or not we can demand automated unit testing from our suppliers. I firmly believe, that proper automated unit-testing is the only way to document the quality and stability of the code. Everyone else seems to think that unit-testing is an optional method that concerns the supplier alone. Thus, we will make no demands of automated unit-testing, continous testing, coverage-reports, inspections of unit-tests or any of the kind. I find this policy extremely frustrating. Am I totally out of line here? Please provide me with arguments for any of the oppinions.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >