Search Results

Search found 6591 results on 264 pages for 'rules engines'.

Page 45/264 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

  • How to approach ninject container/kernel in inheritance situation

    - by Bas
    I have the following situation: class RuleEngine {} abstract class RuleImplementation {} class RootRule : RuleImplementation {} class Rule1 : RuleImplementation {} class Rule2 : RuleImplementation {} The RuleEngine is injected by Ninject and has a kernel at it's disposal, the role of the RuleEngine is to fire off the root rule, which on it's turn will load all the other rules also using Ninject, but using a different Module and creating a new Kernel. Now my question is, some of the rules require some dependencies which I want to inject using Ninject. What would be the best way to create the kernel for these rules and also still do proper unit testing with it? (the kernel shouldn't become a real pain in my tests) I've been thinking of the following possibilitys: The kernel that I use in the RuleEngine class could be tossed around to RuleImplementation and thus be available for every rule. But tossing around Kernels isn't really something I wish to do. When creating the rules, I could give the kernel (which creates the rules) as a constructor argument for each rule. I could create a method inside the RuleImplementation which creates a kernel and makes it possible for the rules to retrieve the kernel using a get() in the abstract class Whats the convention of passing around/creating kernels? Just create new kernels, or reuse them?

    Read the article

  • Why linking doesn't work in my Xtext-based DSL?

    - by reprogrammer
    The following is the Xtext grammar for my DSL. Model: variableTypes=VariableTypes predicateTypes=PredicateTypes variableDeclarations= VariableDeclarations rules=Rules; VariableType: name=ID; VariableTypes: 'var types' (variableTypes+=VariableType)+; PredicateTypes: 'predicate types' (predicateTypes+=PredicateType)+; PredicateType: name=ID '(' (variableTypes+=[VariableType|ID])+ ')'; VariableDeclarations: 'vars' (variableDeclarations+=VariableDeclaration)+; VariableDeclaration: name=ID ':' type=[VariableType|ID]; Rules: 'rules' (rules+=Rule)+; Rule: head=Head ':-' body=Body; Head: predicate=Predicate; Body: (predicates+=Predicate)+; Predicate: predicateType=[PredicateType|ID] '(' (terms+=Term)+ ')'; Term: variable=Variable; Variable: variableDeclaration=[VariableDeclaration|ID]; terminal WS: (' ' | '\t' | '\r' | '\n' | ',')+; And, the following is a program in the above DSL. var types Node predicate types Edge(Node, Node) Path(Node, Node) vars x : Node y : Node z : Node rules Path(x, y) :- Edge(x, y) Path(x, y) :- Path(x, z) Path(z, y) When I used the generated Switch class to traverse the EMF object model corresponding to the above program, I realized that the nodes are not linked together properly. For example, the getPredicateType() method on a Predicate node returns null. Having read the Xtext user's guide, my impression is that the Xtext default linking semantics should work for my DSL. But, for some reason, the AST nodes of my DSL don't get linked together properly. Can anyone help me in diagnosing this problem?

    Read the article

  • Data Auditor by Example

    - by Jinjin.Wang
    OWB has a node Data Auditors under Oracle Module in Projects Navigator. What is data auditor and how to use it? I will give an introduction to data auditor and show its usage by examples. Data auditor is an important tool in ensuring that data quality levels meet business requirements. Data auditor validates data against a set of data rules to determine which records comply and which do not. It gathers statistical metrics on how well the data in a system complies with a rule by auditing and marking how many errors are occurring against the audited table. Data auditors are typically scheduled for regular execution as part of a process flow, to monitor the quality of the data in an operational environment such as a data warehouse or ERP system, either immediately after updates like data loads, or at regular intervals. How to use data auditor to monitor data quality? Only objects with data rules can be monitored, so the first step is to define data rules according to business requirements and apply them to the objects you want to monitor. The objects can be tables, views, materialized views, and external tables. Secondly create a data auditor containing the objects. You can configure the data auditor and set physical deployment parameters for it as optional, which will be used while running the data auditor. Then deploy and run the data auditor either manually or as part of the process flow. After execution, the data auditor sets several output values, and records that are identified as not complying with the defined data rules contained in the data auditor are written to error tables. Here is an example. We have two tables DEPARTMENTS and EMPLOYEES (see pic-1 and pic-2. Click here for DDL and data) imported into OWB. We want to gather statistical metrics on how well data in these two tables satisfies the following requirements: a. Values of the EMPLOYEES.EMPLOYEE_ID attribute are three-digit numbers. b. Valid values for EMPLOYEES.JOB_ID are IT_PROG, SA_REP, SH_CLERK, PU_CLERK, and ST_CLERK. c. EMPLOYEES.EMPLOYEE_ID is related to DEPARTMENTS.MANAGER_ID. Pic-1 EMPLOYEES Pic-2 DEPARTMENTS 1. To determine legal data within EMPLOYEES or legal relationships between data in different columns of the two tables, firstly we define data rules based on the three requirements and apply them to tables. a. The first requirement is about patterns that an attribute is allowed to conform to. We create a Domain Pattern List data rule EMPLOYEE_PATTERN_RULE here. The pattern is defined in the Oracle Database regular expression syntax as ^([0-9]{3})$ Apply data rule EMPLOYEE_PATTERN_RULE to table EMPLOYEES.

    Read the article

  • URL Rewrite – Protocol (http/https) in the Action

    - by OWScott
    IIS URL Rewrite supports server variables for pretty much every part of the URL and http header. However, there is one commonly used server variable that isn’t readily available.  That’s the protocol—HTTP or HTTPS. You can easily check if a page request uses HTTP or HTTPS, but that only works in the conditions part of the rule.  There isn’t a variable available to dynamically set the protocol in the action part of the rule.  What I wish is that there would be a variable like {HTTP_PROTOCOL} which would have a value of ‘HTTP’ or ‘HTTPS’.  There is a server variable called {HTTPS}, but the values of ‘on’ and ‘off’ aren’t practical in the action.  You can also use {SERVER_PORT} or {SERVER_PORT_SECURE}, but again, they aren’t useful in the action. Let me illustrate.  The following rule will redirect traffic for http(s)://localtest.me/ to http://www.localtest.me/. <rule name="Redirect to www"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="http://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> The problem is that it forces the request to HTTP even if the original request was for HTTPS. Interestingly enough, I planned to blog about this topic this week when I noticed in my twitter feed yesterday that Jeff Graves, a former colleague of mine, just wrote an excellent blog post about this very topic.  He beat me to the punch by just a couple days.  However, I figured I would still write my blog post on this topic.  While his solution is a excellent one, I personally handle this another way most of the time.  Plus, it’s a commonly asked question that isn’t documented well enough on the web yet, so having another article on the web won’t hurt. I can think of four different ways to handle this, and depending on your situation you may lean towards any of the four.  Don’t let the choices overwhelm you though.  Let’s keep it simple, Option 1 is what I use most of the time, Option 2 is what Jeff proposed and is the safest option, and Option 3 and Option 4 need only be considered if you have a more unique situation.  All four options will work for most situations. Option 1 – CACHE_URL, single rule There is a server variable that has the protocol in it; {CACHE_URL}.  This server variable contains the entire URL string (e.g. http://www.localtest.me:80/info.aspx?id=5)  All we need to do is extract the HTTP or HTTPS and we’ll be set. This tends to be my preferred way to handle this situation. Indeed, Jeff did briefly mention this in his blog post: … you could use a condition on the CACHE_URL variable and a back reference in the rewritten URL. The problem there is that you then need to match all of the conditions which could be a problem if your rule depends on a logical “or” match for conditions. Thus the problem.  If you have multiple conditions set to “Match Any” rather than “Match All” then this option won’t work.  However, I find that 95% of all rules that I write use “Match All” and therefore, being the lazy administrator that I am I like this simple solution that only requires adding a single condition to a rule.  The caveat is that if you use “Match Any” then you must consider one of the next two options. Enough with the preamble.  Here’s how it works.  Add a condition that checks for {CACHE_URL} with a pattern of “^(.+)://” like so: How you have a back-reference to the part before the ://, which is our treasured HTTP or HTTPS.  In URL Rewrite 2.0 or greater you can check the “Track capture groups across conditions”, make that condition the first condition, and you have yourself a back-reference of {C:1}. The “Redirect to www” example with support for maintaining the protocol, will become: <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions trackAllCaptures="true"> <add input="{CACHE_URL}" pattern="^(.+)://" /> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{C:1}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> It’s not as easy as it would be if Microsoft gave us a built-in {HTTP_PROTOCOL} variable, but it’s pretty close. I also like this option since I often create rule examples for other people and this type of rule is portable since it’s self-contained within a single rule. Option 2 – Using a Rewrite Map For a safer rule that works for both “Match Any” and “Match All” situations, you can use the Rewrite Map solution that Jeff proposed.  It’s a perfectly good solution with the only drawback being the ever so slight extra effort to set it up since you need to create a rewrite map before you create the rule.  In other words, if you choose to use this as your sole method of handling the protocol, you’ll be safe. After you create a Rewrite Map called MapProtocol, you can use “{MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}” for the protocol within any rule action.  Following is an example using a Rewrite Map. <rewrite> <rules> <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> </rules> <rewriteMaps> <rewriteMap name="MapProtocol"> <add key="on" value="https" /> <add key="off" value="http" /> </rewriteMap> </rewriteMaps> </rewrite> Option 3 – CACHE_URL, Multi-rule If you have many rules that will use the protocol, you can create your own server variable which can be used in subsequent rules. This option is no easier to set up than Option 2 above, but you can use it if you prefer the easier to remember syntax of {HTTP_PROTOCOL} vs. {MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}. The potential issue with this rule is that if you don’t have access to the server level (e.g. in a shared environment) then you cannot set server variables without permission. First, create a rule and place it at the top of the set of rules.  You can create this at the server, site or subfolder level.  However, if you create it at the site or subfolder level then the HTTP_PROTOCOL server variable needs to be approved at the server level.  This can be achieved in IIS Manager by navigating to URL Rewrite at the server level, clicking on “View Server Variables” from the Actions pane, and added HTTP_PROTOCOL. If you create the rule at the server level then this step is not necessary.  Following is an example of the first rule to create the HTTP_PROTOCOL and then a rule that uses it.  The Create HTTP_PROTOCOL rule only needs to be created once on the server. <rule name="Create HTTP_PROTOCOL"> <match url=".*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{CACHE_URL}" pattern="^(.+)://" /> </conditions> <serverVariables> <set name="HTTP_PROTOCOL" value="{C:1}" /> </serverVariables> <action type="None" /> </rule>   <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{HTTP_PROTOCOL}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> Option 4 – Multi-rule Just to be complete I’ll include an example of how to achieve the same thing with multiple rules. I don’t see any reason to use it over the previous examples, but I’ll include an example anyway.  Note that it will only work with the “Match All” setting for the conditions. <rule name="Redirect to www - http" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> <add input="{HTTPS}" pattern="off" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="http://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> <rule name="Redirect to www - https" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> <add input="{HTTPS}" pattern="on" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="https://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> Conclusion Above are four working examples of methods to call the protocol (HTTP or HTTPS) from the action of a URL Rewrite rule.  You can use whichever method you most prefer.  I’ve listed them in the order that I favor them, although I could see some people preferring Option 2 as their first choice.  In any of the cases, hopefully you can use this as a reference for when you need to use the protocol in the rule’s action when writing your URL Rewrite rules. Further information: Viewing all Server Variable for a site. URL Parts available to URL Rewrite Rules Further URL Rewrite articles

    Read the article

  • Social Search: Looking for Love

    - by Mike Stiles
    For marketers and enterprise executives who have placed a higher priority on and allocated bigger budgets to search over social, it might be time to notice yet another shift that’s well underway. Social is search. Search marketing was always more of an internal slam-dunk than other digital initiatives. Even a C-suite that understood little about the new technology world knew it’s a good thing when people are able to find you. Google was the new Yellow Pages. Only with Google, you could get your listing first without naming yourself “AAAA Plumbing.” There were wizards out there who could give your business prominence in front of people who were specifically looking for what you offered. Other search giants like Bing also came along to offer such ideal matchmaking possibilities. But what if the consumer isn’t using a search engine to find what they’re looking for? And what if the search engines started altering their algorithms so that search placement manipulation was more difficult? Both of those things have started to happen. Experian Hitwise’s numbers show that visits to the major search engines in the UK dropped 100 million through August. Search engines are far from dead, or even challenged. But more and more, the public is discovering the sites and brands they need through advice they get via social, not search. You’ll find the worlds of social and search increasingly co-mingling as well. Search behemoths Google and Bing are including Facebook and Google+ into their engines. Meanwhile, Facebook and Twitter have done some integration of global web search into their platforms. So what makes social such a worthwhile search entity for brands? First and foremost, the consumer has demonstrated a behavior of acting on recommendations from social connections. A cry in the wilderness like, “Anybody know any good catering companies?” will usually yield a link (and an endorsement) from a friend such as “Yeah, check out Just-Cheese-Balls Catering.” There’s no such human-driven force/influence behind the big search engines. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and others call it “Friend Mining.” It is, in essence, searching for answers from friends’ experiences as opposed to faceless code. And Facebook has all of those friends’ experiences already stored as data. eMarketer says search in an $18 billion business, and investors are really into it. So no shock Facebook’s ready to leverage their social graph into relevant search. What do you do about all this as a brand? For one thing, it’s going to lead to some interesting paid marketing opportunities around the corner, including Sponsored Stories bought against certain queries, inserting deals into search results, capitalizing on social search results on mobile, etc. Apart from that, it might be time to stop mentally separating social and search in your strategic planning and budgeting. Courting your fans on social will cumulatively add up to more valuable, personally endorsed recommendations for your company when a consumer conducts a search on social. Fail to foster those relationships, fail to engage, fail to provide knock-em-dead customer service, fail to wow them with your actual products and services…and you’ll wind up with the visibility you deserve in social search results.

    Read the article

  • Domain Validation in a CQRS architecture

    - by Jupaol
    Basically I want to know if there is a better way to validate my domain entities. This is how I am planning to do it but I would like your opinion The first approach I considered was: class Customer : EntityBase<Customer> { public void ChangeEmail(string email) { if(string.IsNullOrWhitespace(email)) throw new DomainException(“...”); if(!email.IsEmail()) throw new DomainException(); if(email.Contains(“@mailinator.com”)) throw new DomainException(); } } I actually do not like this validation because even when I am encapsulating the validation logic in the correct entity, this is violating the Open/Close principle (Open for extension but Close for modification) and I have found that violating this principle, code maintenance becomes a real pain when the application grows up in complexity. Why? Because domain rules change more often than we would like to admit, and if the rules are hidden and embedded in an entity like this, they are hard to test, hard to read, hard to maintain but the real reason why I do not like this approach is: if the validation rules change, I have to come and edit my domain entity. This has been a really simple example but in RL the validation could be more complex So following the philosophy of Udi Dahan, making roles explicit, and the recommendation from Eric Evans in the blue book, the next try was to implement the specification pattern, something like this class EmailDomainIsAllowedSpecification : IDomainSpecification<Customer> { private INotAllowedEmailDomainsResolver invalidEmailDomainsResolver; public bool IsSatisfiedBy(Customer customer) { return !this.invalidEmailDomainsResolver.GetInvalidEmailDomains().Contains(customer.Email); } } But then I realize that in order to follow this approach I had to mutate my entities first in order to pass the value being valdiated, in this case the email, but mutating them would cause my domain events being fired which I wouldn’t like to happen until the new email is valid So after considering these approaches, I came out with this one, since I am going to implement a CQRS architecture: class EmailDomainIsAllowedValidator : IDomainInvariantValidator<Customer, ChangeEmailCommand> { public void IsValid(Customer entity, ChangeEmailCommand command) { if(!command.Email.HasValidDomain()) throw new DomainException(“...”); } } Well that’s the main idea, the entity is passed to the validator in case we need some value from the entity to perform the validation, the command contains the data coming from the user and since the validators are considered injectable objects they could have external dependencies injected if the validation requires it. Now the dilemma, I am happy with a design like this because my validation is encapsulated in individual objects which brings many advantages: easy unit test, easy to maintain, domain invariants are explicitly expressed using the Ubiquitous Language, easy to extend, validation logic is centralized and validators can be used together to enforce complex domain rules. And even when I know I am placing the validation of my entities outside of them (You could argue a code smell - Anemic Domain) but I think the trade-off is acceptable But there is one thing that I have not figured out how to implement it in a clean way. How should I use this components... Since they will be injected, they won’t fit naturally inside my domain entities, so basically I see two options: Pass the validators to each method of my entity Validate my objects externally (from the command handler) I am not happy with the option 1 so I would explain how I would do it with the option 2 class ChangeEmailCommandHandler : ICommandHandler<ChangeEmailCommand> { public void Execute(ChangeEmailCommand command) { private IEnumerable<IDomainInvariantValidator> validators; // here I would get the validators required for this command injected, and in here I would validate them, something like this using (var t = this.unitOfWork.BeginTransaction()) { var customer = this.unitOfWork.Get<Customer>(command.CustomerId); this.validators.ForEach(x =. x.IsValid(customer, command)); // here I know the command is valid // the call to ChangeEmail will fire domain events as needed customer.ChangeEmail(command.Email); t.Commit(); } } } Well this is it. Can you give me your thoughts about this or share your experiences with Domain entities validation EDIT I think it is not clear from my question, but the real problem is: Hiding the domain rules has serious implications in the future maintainability of the application, and also domain rules change often during the life-cycle of the app. Hence implementing them with this in mind would let us extend them easily. Now imagine in the future a rules engine is implemented, if the rules are encapsulated outside of the domain entities, this change would be easier to implement

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 R2 IPsec encryption in tunnel mode, hosts in same subnet

    - by fission
    In Windows there appear to be two ways to set up IPsec: The IP Security Policy Management MMC snap-in (part of secpol.msc, introduced in Windows 2000). The Windows Firewall with Advanced Security MMC snap-in (wf.msc, introduced in Windows 2008/Vista). My question concerns #2 – I already figured out what I need to know for #1. (But I want to use the ‘new’ snap-in for its improved encryption capabilities.) I have two Windows Server 2008 R2 computers in the same domain (domain members), on the same subnet: server2 172.16.11.20 server3 172.16.11.30 My goal is to encrypt all communication between these two machines using IPsec in tunnel mode, so that the protocol stack is: IP ESP IP …etc. First, on each computer, I created a Connection Security Rule: Endpoint 1: (local IP address), eg 172.16.11.20 for server2 Endpoint 2: (remote IP address), eg 172.16.11.30 Protocol: Any Authentication: Require inbound and outbound, Computer (Kerberos V5) IPsec tunnel: Exempt IPsec protected connections Local tunnel endpoint: Any Remote tunnel endpoint: (remote IP address), eg 172.16.11.30 At this point, I can ping each machine, and Wireshark shows me the protocol stack; however, nothing is encrypted (which is expected at this point). I know that it's unencrypted because Wireshark can decode it (using the setting Attempt to detect/decode NULL encrypted ESP payloads) and the Monitor Security Associations Quick Mode display shows ESP Encryption: None. Then on each server, I created Inbound and Outbound Rules: Protocol: Any Local IP addresses: (local IP address), eg 172.16.11.20 Remote IP addresses: (remote IP address), eg 172.16.11.30 Action: Allow the connection if it is secure Require the connections to be encrypted The problem: Though I create the Inbound and Outbound Rules on each server to enable encryption, the data is still going over the wire (wrapped in ESP) with NULL encryption. (You can see this in Wireshark.) When the arrives at the receiving end, it's rejected (presumably because it's unencrypted). [And, disabling the Inbound rule on the receiving end causes it to lock up and/or bluescreen – fun!] The Windows Firewall log says, eg: 2014-05-30 22:26:28 DROP ICMP 172.16.11.20 172.16.11.30 - - 60 - - - - 8 0 - RECEIVE I've tried varying a few things: In the Rules, setting the local IP address to Any Toggling the Exempt IPsec protected connections setting Disabling rules (eg disabling one or both sets of Inbound or Outbound rules) Changing the protocol (eg to just TCP) But realistically there aren't that many knobs to turn. Does anyone have any ideas? Has anyone tried to set up tunnel mode between two hosts using Windows Firewall? I've successfully got it set up in transport mode (ie no tunnel) using exactly the same set of rules, so I'm a bit surprised that it didn't Just Work™ with the tunnel added.

    Read the article

  • Javascript on a desktop wallpaper (XP)

    - by Arcath
    I have a desktop wallpaper shipped out by my domain, it's a HTML wallpaper that displays information like today's date, etc. It also has the internet usage rules. Using jquery I've made it so that the rules are hidden and displayed when you click on the section heading. The JS runs fine and it hides the rules, but it appears that once the desktop "loses focus" the javascript stops and clicking the headings does nothing. Anyone know a way to keep javascript running?

    Read the article

  • F5 BIG_IP persistence iRules applied but not affecting selected member

    - by zoli
    I have a virtual server. I have 2 iRules (see below) assigned to it as resources. From the server log it looks like that the rules are running and they select the correct member from the pool after persisting the session (as far as I can tell based on my log messages), but the requests are ultimately directed to somewhere else. Here's how both rules look like: when HTTP_RESPONSE { set sessionId [HTTP::header X-SessionId] if {$sessionId ne ""} { persist add uie $sessionId 3600 log local0.debug "Session persisted: <$sessionId> to <[persist lookup uie $sessionId]>" } } when HTTP_REQUEST { set sessionId [findstr [HTTP::path] "/session/" 9 /] if {$sessionId ne ""} { persist uie $sessionId set persistValue [persist lookup uie $sessionId] log local0.debug "Found persistence key <$sessionId> : <$persistValue>" } } According to the log messages from the rules, the proper balancer members are selected. Note: the two rules can not conflict, they are looking for different things in the path. Those two things never appear in the same path. Notes about the server: * The default load balancing method is RR. * There is no persistence profile assigned to the virtual server. I'm wondering if this should be adequate to enable the persistence, or alternatively, do I have to combine the 2 rules and create a persistence profile with them for the virtual server? Or is there something else that I have missed?

    Read the article

  • Linux service --status-all shows "Firewall is stopped." what service does firewall refer to?

    - by codewaggle
    I have a development server with the lamp stack running CentOS: [Prompt]# cat /etc/redhat-release CentOS release 5.8 (Final) [Prompt]# cat /proc/version Linux version 2.6.18-308.16.1.el5xen ([email protected]) (gcc version 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-52)) #1 SMP Tue Oct 2 22:50:05 EDT 2012 [Prompt]# yum info iptables Loaded plugins: fastestmirror Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: mirror.anl.gov * extras: centos.mirrors.tds.net * rpmfusion-free-updates: mirror.us.leaseweb.net * rpmfusion-nonfree-updates: mirror.us.leaseweb.net * updates: mirror.steadfast.net Installed Packages Name : iptables Arch : x86_64 Version : 1.3.5 Release : 9.1.el5 Size : 661 k Repo : installed .... Snip.... When I run: service --status-all Part of the output looks like this: .... Snip.... httpd (pid xxxxx) is running... Firewall is stopped. Table: filter Chain INPUT (policy DROP) num target prot opt source destination 1 RH-Firewall-1-INPUT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain FORWARD (policy DROP) num target prot opt source destination 1 RH-Firewall-1-INPUT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) num target prot opt source destination Chain RH-Firewall-1-INPUT (2 references) ....Snip.... iptables has been loaded to the kernel and is active as represented by the rules being displayed. Checking just the iptables returns the rules just like status all does: [Prompt]# service iptables status Table: filter Chain INPUT (policy DROP) num target prot opt source destination 1 RH-Firewall-1-INPUT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain FORWARD (policy DROP) num target prot opt source destination 1 RH-Firewall-1-INPUT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) num target prot opt source destination Chain RH-Firewall-1-INPUT (2 references) .... Snip.... Starting or restarting iptables indicates that the iptables have been loaded to the kernel successfully: [Prompt]# service iptables restart Flushing firewall rules: [ OK ] Setting chains to policy ACCEPT: filter [ OK ] Unloading iptables modules: [ OK ] Applying iptables firewall rules: [ OK ] Loading additional iptables modules: ip_conntrack_netbios_n[ OK ] [Prompt]# service iptables start Flushing firewall rules: [ OK ] Setting chains to policy ACCEPT: filter [ OK ] Unloading iptables modules: [ OK ] Applying iptables firewall rules: [ OK ] Loading additional iptables modules: ip_conntrack_netbios_n[ OK ] I've googled "Firewall is stopped." and read a number of iptables guides as well as the RHEL documentation, but no luck. As far as I can tell, there isn't a "Firewall" service, so what is the line "Firewall is stopped." referring to?

    Read the article

  • .htaccess redirect, from old dirty URL to a clean new URL with parameters

    - by JustAnil
    I have the following 2 links, I'm not great with .htaccess rules yet. Old URL: http://www.mywebsite.org.uk/donate/donate.php?charity_id=885&project_id=18111 New URL: http://new.mywebsite.org.uk/donation/to/885/18111 I want all the traffic coming from the old URL to the new url (including the parameters charity_id & project_id). I'm trying to learn .htaccess rules, but finding the tutorials online to be kinda vague. I'd really like a simple explanation on the .htaccess rules. (Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime). The correct answer will be the answer with a simple and useful explanation (along with the rules if possible!).

    Read the article

  • iptables blank after reboot

    - by theillien
    We've started encountering an issue with iptables on our RHEL 6.3 systems in that after a reboot, when the service starts, the rules are not loaded. We get the empty ruleset: [msnyder@matt-test ~]$ sudo iptables -L Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination This is in spite of the fact that we have rules defined and the service is, indeed, running. That I know because when I run service iptables start it simply drops back to the prompt. If I run service iptables restart it actually stops and then restarts the service. And, of course, if I run service iptables stop it indicates that iptables is actually stopping. Knowing that I need to restart the service, I do so and the rules load up properly. They simply don't get loaded after a reboot. Unless they get loaded differently during a reboot I don't see how our rules would be wrong. If they were, they wouldn't even load during a service restart. Has anyone else ever encountered this? EDIT: The rules are already saved in /etc/sysconfig/iptables. They are not added on the fly from the command line so service iptables save is unnecessary.

    Read the article

  • How do I set up pairing email addresses?

    - by James A. Rosen
    Our team uses the Ruby gem hitch to manage pairing. You set it up with a group email address (e.g. [email protected]) and then tell it who is pairing: $ hitch james tiffany Hitch then sets your Git author configuration so that our commits look like commit 629dbd4739eaa91a720dd432c7a8e6e1a511cb2d Author: James and Tiffany <[email protected]> Date: Thu Oct 31 13:59:05 2013 -0700 Unfortunately, we've only been able to come up with two options: [email protected] doesn't exist. The downside is that if Travis CI tries to notify us that we broke the build, we don't see it. [email protected] does exist and forwards to all the developers. Now the downside is that everyone gets spammed with every broken build by every pair. We have too many possible pair to do any of the following: set up actual [email protected] email addresses or groups (n^2 email addresses) set up forwarding rules for [email protected] (n^2 forwarding rules) set up forwarding rules for [email protected] (n forwarding rules for each of n developers) Does anyone have a system that works for them?

    Read the article

  • Adding dynamic business logic/business process checks to a system

    - by Jordan Reiter
    I'm wondering if there is a good extant pattern (language here is Python/Django but also interested on the more abstract level) for creating a business logic layer that can be created without coding. For example, suppose that a house rental should only be available during a specific time. A coder might create the following class: from bizlogic import rules, LogicRule from orders.models import Order class BeachHouseAvailable(LogicRule): def check(self, reservation): house = reservation.house_reserved if not (house.earliest_available < reservation.starts < house.latest_available ) raise RuleViolationWhen("Beach house is available only between %s and %s" % (house.earliest_available, house.latest_available)) return True rules.add(Order, BeachHouseAvailable, name="BeachHouse Available") This is fine, but I don't want to have to code something like this each time a new rule is needed. I'd like to create something dynamic, ideally something that can be stored in a database. The thing is, it would have to be flexible enough to encompass a wide variety of rules: avoiding duplicates/overlaps (to continue the example "You already have a reservation for this time/location") logic rules ("You can't rent a house to yourself", "This house is in a different place from your chosen destination") sanity tests ("You've set a rental price that's 10x the normal rate. Are you sure this is the right price?" Things like that. Before I recreate the wheel, I'm wondering if there are already methods out there for doing something like this.

    Read the article

  • Formalizing a requirements spec written in narrative English

    - by ProfK
    I have a fairly technical functionality requirements spec, expressed in English prose, produced by my project manager. It is structured as a collection of UI tabs, where the requirements for each tab are expressed as a lit of UI fields and a list of business rules for the tab. Most business rules are for UI fields on a tab, e.g: a) Must be alphanumeric, max length 20. b) Must be a dropdown, with values from table x. c) Is mandatory. d) Is mandatory under certain conditions, e.g. another field is just populated, or has a specific value. Then other business rules get a little more complex. The spec is for a job application, so the central business object (table) is the Applicant, and we have several other tables with one-to-many relationships with applicant, such as Degree, HighSchool, PreviousEmployer, Diploma, etc. e) One such complex rule says a status field can only be assigned a certain value if a many-side record exists in at least one of the many-side tables. E.g. the Applicant has at least one HighSchool or at least one Diploma record. I am looking for advice on how to codify these requirements into a more structured specification defined in terms of tables, fields, and relationships, especially for the conditional rules for fields and for the presence of related records. Any suggestions and advice will be most welcome, but I would be overjoyed if i could find an already defined system or structure for expressing things like this.

    Read the article

  • Codifying a natural language requirements spec

    - by ProfK
    I have a fairly technical functionality requirements spec, expressed in English prose, produced by my project manager. It is structured as a collection of UI tabs, where the requirements for each tab are expressed as a lit of UI fields and a list of business rules for the tab. Most business rules are for UI fields on a tab, e.g: a) Must be alphanumeric, max length 20. b) Must be a dropdown, with values from table x. c) Is mandatory. d) Is mandatory under certain conditions, e.g. another field is just populated, or has a specific value. Then other business rules get a little more complex. The spec is for a job application, so the central business object (table) is the Applicant, and we have several other tables with one-to-many relationships with applicant, such as Degree, HighSchool, PreviousEmployer, Diploma, etc. e) One such complex rule says a status field can only be assigned a certain value if a many-side record exists in at least one of the many-side tables. E.g. the Applicant has at least one HighSchool or at least one Diploma record. I am looking for advice on how to codify these requirements into a more structured specification defined in terms of tables, fields, and relationships, especially for the conditional rules for fields and for the presence of related records. Any suggestions and advice will be most welcome, but I would be overjoyed if i could find an already defined system or structure for expressing things like this.

    Read the article

  • Do you know when to send a done email in Scrum?

    - by Martin Hinshelwood
    At SSW we have always sent done emails to the owner/requestor to let them know that it is done. Others who are dependent on that tasks are CC’ed so they know they can proceed. But how does that fit into Scrum?   Update 14th April 2010 Rule added to Rules to better Scrum with TFS If you are working on a task: When you complete a Task that is part of a User Story you need to send a done email to the Owner of that Story. You only need to add the Task #, Summary and link to the item in WIWA. Remember that all your tasks should be under 4 hours, do spending lots of time on a Done Email for a Task would be counter productive. Add more information if required, for example you may have completed the task a different way than previously discussed.  Make sure that every User Story has an Owner as per the rules. If you are the owner of a story: When you complete a story you should send a comprehensive done email as per the rules when the story had been completed. Make sure you add a list of all of the Tasks that were completed as part of the story and the Done criteria that you completed. If your done criteria says: Built Successfully 30% Code Coverage All tests passed Then add an illustration to show this. Figure: Show that you have met your Done criteria where possible.   This is all designed to help you Scrum Team members (Product Owner, ScrumMaster and Team) validate the quality of the work that has been completed. Remember that you are not DONE until your team says you are done.   Technorati Tags: SSW,Scrum,SSW Rules

    Read the article

  • autostart app with tag in awm

    - by nonsenz
    while giving awm a try i encounter some problems. i want to autostart some apps when awm is started with specific tags. here's the relevant config i use for that. first my tags with layouts: tags = { names = {"mail", "www", "video", "files", 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}, layout = {layouts[11], layouts[11], layouts[11], layouts[11], layouts[1], layouts[1], layouts[1], layouts[1], layouts[1]} } for s = 1, screen.count() do -- Each screen has its own tag table. tags[s] = awful.tag(tags.names, s, tags.layout) end now the app-autostart stuff: awful.util.spawn("chromium-browser") awful.util.spawn("firefox") awful.util.spawn("vlc") awful.util.spawn_with_shell("xterm -name files -e mc") awful.util.spawn_with_shell("xterm -name 5term") awful.util.spawn_with_shell("xterm -name 5term") awful.util.spawn_with_shell("xterm -name 5term") awful.util.spawn_with_shell("xterm -name 5term") awful.util.spawn_with_shell("xfce4-power-manager") i use xterm with the -name param to give them custom classes (for custom tags via rules). and now some rules to connect apps with tags: awful.rules.rules = { -- All clients will match this rule. { rule = { }, properties = { border_width = beautiful.border_width, border_color = beautiful.border_normal, focus = true, keys = clientkeys, buttons = clientbuttons } }, { rule = { class = "MPlayer" }, properties = { floating = true } }, { rule = { class = "pinentry" }, properties = { floating = true } }, { rule = { class = "gimp" }, properties = { floating = true } }, -- Set Firefox to always map on tags number 2 of screen 1. -- { rule = { class = "Firefox" }, -- properties = { tag = tags[1][2] } }, { rule = { class = "Firefox" }, properties = { tag = tags[1][2] } }, { rule = { class = "Chromium-browser" }, properties = { tag = tags[1][1] } }, { rule = { class = "Vlc"}, properties = { tag = tags[1][3] } }, { rule = { class = "files"}, properties = { tag = tags[1][4] } }, { rule = { class = "5term"}, properties = { tag = tags[1][5] } }, } it works for chromium, firefox and vlc but not for the xterms with the "-name" param. when i check the xterms after they started with xprop i can see: WM_CLASS(STRING) = "5term", "XTerm" i think that sould work, but the xterms are placed on the first workspace/tag.

    Read the article

  • Ways to break the "Syndrome of the perfect programmer"

    - by Rushino
    I am probably not the only one that feel that way. But I have what I tend to call "The syndrome of the perfect programmer" which many might say is the same as being perfectionist but in this case it's in the domain of programming. However, the domain of programming is a bit problematic for such a syndrome. Have you ever felt that when you are programming you're not confident or never confident enought that your code is clean and good code that follows most of the best practices ? There so many rules to follow that I feel like being overwhelmed somehow. Not that I don't like to follow the rules of course I am a programmer and I love programming, I see this as an art and I must follow the rules. But I love it too, I mean I want and I love to follow the rules in order to have a good feeling of what im doing is going the right way.. but I only wish I could have everything a bit more in "control" regarding best practices and good code. Maybe it's a lack of organization? Maybe it's a lack of experience? Maybe a lack of practice? Maybe it's a lack of something else someone could point out? Is there any way to get rid of that syndrome somehow ?

    Read the article

  • CodePlex Daily Summary for Sunday, May 30, 2010

    CodePlex Daily Summary for Sunday, May 30, 2010New ProjectsAviva Solutions C# Coding Guidelines: A set of C# coding guidelines, coding standards, layout rules, FxCop rulesets and (upcoming) custom FxCop and StyleCop rules for improving the over...BKWork: private project.classbook: du an trong vong 10 ngay. Nhom (Do Bao Linh, Phan Thanh Tai, Nguyen Dang Loc)Du an - 01: Du an mon thay LuongEndNote助手: EndNote Helper is a assistant tool for EndNote, which make your task of reference management more convinent. EndNote 助手是一个用于辅助EndNote进行文献管理的小工具,它可...Evoucher: Simple Evoucher Sales SystemFiddler Delayed Responses Extension: A fiddler extension that help developers delay the delivery of HTML Responses to applications. Some delay user stories: - Delivery of css to HTML ...Generic Entity Model 2: GEM2 is lightweight entity framework for building custom business solutions. It enables rapid approach to entity logic design, while offering out o...GY06: 这个是长大工院于2009年发起的项目,因为种种原因没有完成。JoshDOS: JoshDOS is a command line operating system kernel based off COSMOS. It can be booted from actual hardware and built in Visual Studio using .NET la...PhysicsFMUDeluxe.NET: Este projeto é desenvolvido com o intuíto de treinar o desenvolvimento de aplicações em C#. Ele contém ferramentas para cálculos de física e matemá...Reactor Services Platform: Reactor is a service composition and deployment grid that streamlines developing, composing, deploying and managing services. Reactor Services are ...SerafinApartment: Simple MVC 2 application for apartment rental. It is multingual booking system, that allows users to register, book and subscribe for notifications...Silverlight Audio Effect Box: This is a C# Silverlight 4 sample application which process audio sample in near real time. It allows to capture the default audio input device and...Smart Voice: Smart Voice let's you control Skype using your voice. It allows you to write messages, issue phone calls, etc. This application was developed think...WebDotNet - The minimalist web framework inspired by web.py: WebDotNet is an experiment in web frameworks. Inspired by the python web framework, web.py, it is an exercise in extreme minimalism in a framework...New ReleasesAcies: Acies - Alpha Build 0.0.7: Alpha release. Requires Microsoft XNA Framework Redistributable 3.1 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=53867a2a-e249-4560-...AdventureWorksLT 2008 Sample Database Script: AdventureWorksLT 2008 R2 DB Script: This script is based on latest download from the Sample database for SQL Server 2008 R2. The original download from the sample is approx 84 MB and ...ASP.NET Wiki Control: Release 1.3.1: - Removed ASP.NET Session dependency. BreadCrumbs will now work with sessions disabled. Can now also share a URL and have the breadcrumb appropriat...Aviva Solutions C# Coding Guidelines: Visual Studio 2010 Rule Sets: Rule Sets targetting different styles of projects.bvcms - Bellevue Church Management System: Source: This source was used to build the latest {church}.bvcms.comCC.Yacht: CC.Yacht 1.0.10.529: This is the initial release of CC.Yacht. Marked as beta since I don't have any testing/feedback beyond that of myself and my wife.Community Forums NNTP bridge: Community Forums NNTP Bridge V14: Release of the Community Forums NNTP Bridge to access the social and anwsers MS forums with a single, open source NNTP bridge. This release has add...Community Forums NNTP bridge: Community Forums NNTP Bridge V15: Release of the Community Forums NNTP Bridge to access the social and anwsers MS forums with a single, open source NNTP bridge. This release has add...Coronasoft Cryostasis scripting engine: CCSE v0.0.1.0 BETA: This is the 0.0.1.0 Beta Release. If you find any bugs Post them as a comment or in the Discussions tabEndNote助手: EndNote助手2.1.0..0: 去除了注册验证机制。Fiddler Delayed Responses Extension: v0.1: Version 0.1 of Fiddler Delayed Responses Extension. See ChangeLog for more information.Generic Entity Model 2: GEM2 build 52510: This is first BETA release of GEM2! Following implementation is still missing from initial plan: Detailed documentation MySQL operational databa...JoshDOS: JoshDOS Souce: This is the souce for the JoshDOS 1.0 OS kernel. You need the COSMOS user kit to use.JoshDOS: Shell Version 1.0: Whats in this download *JoshDOS user kit *JoshDOS VStudio starter kit *JoshDOS documentation Note: You will need the COSMOS user kit to start deve...miniTodo: mini Todo version 0.3: Todo完了時に音が出なかったのを修正Model Virtual Casting - ASPItalia.com: Model Virtual Casting 0.2: Model Virtual Casting 0.2Questa seconda release di ModelVC è corrispondente a quella mostrata in occasione della Real Code Conference 4.0 tenutasi ...PhysicsFMUDeluxe.NET: PhysicsFMUDeluxe.NET - Setup: Primeira versão pública do PhysicsFMUDeluxe.NETSilverlight Audio Effect Box: Echo Box 1.0: First realease - zip contains : web page + xap file :Smart Voice: Smart Voice 0.1: Here is the first alpha release of Smart Voice. Please remember this was done for a curricular unit project at my university and i understand that ...StyleCop Contrib: Custom rules v0.2: This release of the custom rules target StyleCop 4.3.3. Included rules are: Spacing Rules - NoTrailingWhiteSpace - IndentUsingTabs Ordering Rules ...System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations Contrib: 0.2.46280.0: Built with Visual Studio 2010/.Net 4.0. Compiled from source code changeset 46280.VB Styler: VB Styler Suite V 1.3.0.0: This is the newest version of the VB Styler. Here are the new features. New Imaging ColorPicker A template for getting colors via sliders ColorR...VCC: Latest build, v2.1.30529.0: Automatic drop of latest buildWPF Application Framework (WAF): WPF Application Framework (WAF) 1.0.0.90 RC: Version: 1.0.0.90 (Release Candidate): This release contains the source code of the WPF Application Framework (WAF) and the sample applications. ...XNA Collision Detection: XNA Collision Detection Sample Program: I have coded a compact program which shows the collision detection working, and provides a camera class for rendering and moving the "player." Agai...Most Popular ProjectsRawrWBFS ManagerAJAX Control ToolkitMicrosoft SQL Server Product Samples: DatabaseSilverlight ToolkitWindows Presentation Foundation (WPF)patterns & practices – Enterprise LibraryMicrosoft SQL Server Community & SamplesPHPExcelASP.NETMost Active ProjectsAStar.netpatterns & practices – Enterprise LibraryCommunity Forums NNTP bridgeBlogEngine.NETGMap.NET - Great Maps for Windows Forms & PresentationIonics Isapi Rewrite FilterRawrCustomer Portal Accelerator for Microsoft Dynamics CRMFacebook Developer ToolkitPAP

    Read the article

  • PASS Summit 2010 BI Workshop Feedbacks

    - by Davide Mauri
    As many other speakers already did, I’d like to share with the SQL Community the feedback of my PASS Summit 2010 Workshop. For those who were not there, my workshop was the “BI From A-Z” and the main objective of that workshop was to introduce people in the BI world not only from a technical point of view but insist a lot on the methodological and “engineered” approach. The will to put more engineering in the IT (and specially in the BI field) is something that has been growing stronger and stronger in me every day for of this last 5 years since is simply envy the fact that Airbus, Fincatieri, BMW (just to name a few) can create very complex machine “just” using putting people together and giving them some rules to follow (Of course this is an oversimplification but I think you get what I mean). The key point of engineering is that, after having defined the project blueprint, you have the possibility to give to a huge number of people, the rules to follow, the correct tools in order to implement the rules easily and semi-automatically and a way to measure the quality of the results. Could this be done in IT? Very big question, so my scope is now limited to BI. So that’s the main point of my workshop: and entry-level approach to BI (level was 200) in order to allow attendees to know the basics, to understand what tools they should use for which purpose and, above all, a set of rules and tools in order to make a BI solution scalable in terms of people working on it, while still maintaining a very good quality. All done not focusing only on the practice but explaining the theory behind to see how it can help *a lot* to build a correct solution despite the technology used to implement it. The idea is to reach a point where more then 70% of the work done to create a BI solution can be reused even if technologies changes. This is a very demanding challenge nowadays with the coming of Denali and its column-aligned storage and the shiny-new DAX language. As you may understand I was looking forward to get the feedback since you may have noticed that there’s a lot of “architectural” stuff in IT but really nothing on “engineering”. So how the session could be perceived by the attendees was really unknown to me. The feedback could also give a good indication if the need of more “engineering” is something I feel only by myself or if is something more broad. I’m very happy to be able to say that the overall score of 4.75 put my workshop in the TOP 20 session (on near 200 sessions)! Here’s the detailed evaluations: How would you rate the usefulness of the information presented in your day-to-day environment? 4.75 Answer:    # of Responses 3    1         4    12        5    42               How would you rate the Speaker's presentation skills? 4.80 Answer:    # of Responses 3 : 1         4 : 9         5 : 45               How would you rate the Speaker's knowledge of the subject? 4.95 Answer:    # of Responses 4 :  3         5 : 52               How would you rate the accuracy of the session title, description and experience level to the actual session? 4.75 Answer:    # of Responses 3 : 2         4 : 10         5 : 43               How would you rate the amount of time allocated to cover the topic/session? 4.44 Answer:    # of Responses 3 : 7         4 : 17        5 : 31               How would you rate the quality of the presentation materials? 4.62 Answer:    # of Responses 4 : 21        5 : 34 The comments where all very positive. Many of them asked for more time on the subject (or to shorten the very last topics). I’ll make treasure of these comments and will review the content accordingly. We’ll organize a two-day classes on this topic, where also more examples will be shown and some arguments will be explained more deeply. I’d just like to answer a comment that asks how much of what I shown is “universally applicable”. I can tell you that all of our BI project follow these rules and they’ve been applied to different markets (Insurance, Fashion, GDO) with different people and different teams and they allowed us to be “Adaptive” against the customer. The more the rules are well defined and the more there are tools that supports their implementations, the easier is to add new people to the project and to add or change solution features. Think of a car. How come that almost any mechanic can help you to fix a problem? Because they know what to expect. Because there a rules that allow them to identify the problem without having to discover each time how the car has been implemented build. And this is of course also true for car upgrades/improvements. Last but not least: thanks a lot to everyone for coming!

    Read the article

  • Attach to Process in Visual Studio

    - by Daniel Moth
    One option for achieving step 1 in the Live Debugging process is attaching to an already running instance of the process that hosts your code, and this is a good place for me to talk about debug engines. You can attach to a process by selecting the "Debug" menu and then the "Attach To Process…" menu in Visual Studio 11 (Ctrl+Alt+P with my keyboard bindings), and you should see something like this screenshot: I am not going to explain this UI, besides being fairly intuitive, there is good documentation on MSDN for the Attach dialog. I do want to focus on the row of controls that starts with the "Attach to:" label and ends with the "Select..." button. Between them is the readonly textbox that indicates the debug engine that will be used for the selected process if you click the "Attach" button. If you haven't encountered that term before, read on MSDN about debug engines. Notice that the "Type" column shows the Code Type(s) that can be detected for the process. Typically each debug engine knows how to debug a specific code type (the two terms tend to be used interchangeably). If you click on a different process in the list with a different code type, the debug engine used will be different. However note that this is the automatic behavior. If you believe you know best, or more typically you want to choose the debug engine for a process using more than one code type, you can do so by clicking the "Select..." button, which should yield a "Select Code Type" dialog like this one: In this dialog you can switch to the debug engine you want to use by checking the box in front of your desired one, then hit "OK", then hit "Attach" to use it. Notice that the dialog suggests that you can select more than one. Not all combinations work (you'll get an error if you select two incompatible debug engines), but some do. Also notice in the list of debug engines one of the new players in Visual Studio 11, the GPU debug engine - I will be covering that on the C++ AMP team blog (and no, it cannot be combined with any others in this release). Comments about this post by Daniel Moth welcome at the original blog.

    Read the article

  • Cannot install ia32-libs

    - by Marcos Junior
    I don't know why I can't install ia32-libs. It claims for a dependency that cannot be found on repos. junior@mediacenter:~$ sudo apt-get install ia32-libs Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: ia32-libs : Depends: ia32-libs-multiarch E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. junior@mediacenter:~$ sudo apt-get install ia32-libs-multiarch Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: ia32-libs-multiarch:i386 : Depends: gstreamer0.10-plugins-good:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: gtk2-engines:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: gtk2-engines-murrine:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: gtk2-engines-pixbuf:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: gtk2-engines-oxygen:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: ibus-gtk:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: libcanberra-gtk-module:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: libcurl3:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: libgail-common:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: libglapi-mesa:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: libglu1-mesa:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: libgtk2.0-0:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: libqt4-opengl:i386 but it is not going to be installed Depends: librsvg2-common:i386 but it is not going to be installed Recommends: libgl1-mesa-glx:i386 but it is not going to be installed Recommends: libgl1-mesa-dri:i386 but it is not going to be installed E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. Running ubuntu Precise: junior@mediacenter:~$ uname -a Linux mediacenter 3.2.0-24-generic #37-Ubuntu SMP Wed Apr 25 08:43:22 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Synaptic fix broken package does nothing. Any tips?? Thanks I need this package to install other apps like teamviewer7.

    Read the article

  • Using Keyword Analysis to Write Articles and Blogs

    Keyword analysis is a process by which you can discover what search phases are used at search engines by users for find information. Keywords are nothing but search words or phrases entered by users at search engines like Google, Yahoo and Bing. For article, blog and web content writers, keyword research is the most important part of the process.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >