Search Results

Search found 11 results on 1 pages for 'sleske'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • "Manual threading" in Thunderbird?

    - by sleske
    I use Thunderbird's threaded view of email messages to group emails together which are related. However, sometimes people will reply to messages using some mail program which does not properly set the headers to tell it's a reply, or will even write a new mail instead of replying. In these cases I would like to manually assign or "dock" a mail to an existing thread. Is there some way / addon to do this in Thunderbird? I'm thinking along the lines of a context menu "attach mail to thread XXX". The mail would then become part of that thread (maybe with a special marker explaining that it was manually grouped).

    Read the article

  • vimdiff: Jump to next difference inside line?

    - by sleske
    vimdiff is very handy for comparing files. However, I often use it on files with long lines and relatively few differences inside the lines. vimdiff will correctly highlight differences inside a line (whole line pink, differing characters red). In these cases, it would be nice to be able to jump to the next difference inside the line. You can jump to the "next difference" (]c), but this will jump to the next line with a difference. Is there a way to go to the next different character inside the current line?

    Read the article

  • Windows XP: Consequences of setting a password for an account

    - by sleske
    I do not quite understand how Windows (specifically Windows XP) handles accounts with/without passwords. As far as I can see, on a fresh Windows XP install I have one default account which has admin rights does not have a password will auto-login (without password prompt) when the computer boots What happens if I set a password for this account? Will it still auto-login? Or will it always prompt for the PW? And generally, what consequences does it have if I set a password? I noted that Scheduled Tasks apparently cannot run under an account w/o password (creating a scheduled task will prompt for the account PW). Is there anything that will not work with a password set? Why is it even possible to have accounts without a password? I have some Unix/Linux background, but the concepts appear a little different under Windows.

    Read the article

  • How do I securely share / allow access to a drive?

    - by sleske
    To simplify backing up a laptop (Windows Vista), I'm planning on sharing its C: drive (with password protection) and using that to back it up from another computer. What are the security implications of this? If I share C: with a reasonable password, how big is the risk of compromise if the system is e.g. inadvertently used on a public WLAN or similar? Background: I'm planning to use [Areca Backup][1] to back up two systems (Windows XP and Vista). My current plan is to install Areca on the XP box, and share the Vista system's C: as a shared folder, so the XP system can read it. Then I can set up the drive as a network drive and have Areca read it like a local drive. Of course, if you can think of a more elegant way of doing this, I'm open to suggestions.

    Read the article

  • What is the oldest hardware still in production use? How is it kept running?

    - by sleske
    In the spirit of the question What is your oldest hardware that still works?, I'd like to ask: What is the oldest hardware you know that is still in production use? And what challenges did you (or someone else) face in keeping it running (scarce documentation, no support, no spare parts available...)? Most organizations will retire / upgrade software and hardware after 5-10 years, but sometimes old software is kept running on old boxes, because it "just works". I once worked at a client site that was running a critical piece of (in-house developed) business software on a single server running HP-UX. The server was old (ca. 12-13 years), but fortunately still running without problems; however, getting spares would have been very difficult, and since software installation was undocumented, any significant system changes or even new hardware might have caused significant downtime and data loss. We eventually managed to replace it, but this is not always possible. I also read that many organizations still run decade-old mainframe hardware, particularly for highly customized systems controlling industrial machines or power plants. Which old hardware have you encountered? How did you manage these challenges? Related question: http://serverfault.com/questions/82467/should-old-servers-be-retired

    Read the article

  • Windows 7: Wi-Fi connection drops intermittently - only returns after "Troubleshoot connection" resets the adapter

    - by sleske
    On our laptop (running Windows 7) the Wi-Fi connection drops intermittently. Symptoms: Connectivity is suddenly lost, and the "signal strenght" indicator in the tray shows zero strength and a yellow "star" symbol. What happens then: The problem does not resolve itself by just waiting. If I click on the tray icon, the "Windows network diagnostics" wizard pops up and tells me that there is a networking problem (duh). If I click on the "repair" button (not sure about the wording), the wizard works for a while, then reports that it has reset the network adapter. Then Wi-Fi works again. While the above procedure has worked every time so far, it is very annoying. It takes 10-20s to repair the connection, and in the meantime downloads, video streams etc. may have been aborted. Some more details: The problem occurs without any apparent regularity, but usually a few minutes after powerup (though not every time). It happens frequently enough to be annoying. It is unlikely to be a router problem - another laptop running at the same time usually has no Wi-Fi problems. I am at a loss about what to try to troubleshoot this. Any ideas? Computer: Acer Aspire 7739Z. Wi-Fi card: Atheros AR5B125

    Read the article

  • How are file permissions applied for shared drives?

    - by sleske
    I have two computers: A (running Windows Vista) B (running XP). I shared C: on computer A (as \\A\C ), and require a username (X) plus pw to access it. If I browse the the share \A\C on computer B, after entering username+pw I can access most folders, but one folder "\\A\C\F" gives me "permission denied". I looked at that folder's permissions on A, and it has full access permissons for all "Administrators". I use the account "A\X" to authenticate when accessing the share on A. X is a user account (on A) that is an "Administrator" according to Window's user management. Still, I cannot access this folder. If I explicitly add the "X" account to the accounts that may access folder F (under Properties / Security), I can access it without problems. I do not understand why I need to explicitly grant permission for X to get access to F. Is it not enough that X is an Administrator account?

    Read the article

  • Can IP v4 and IP v6 share a single physical Ethernet?

    - by sleske
    I keep reading about the transition from IP v4 to IP v6, and the possible advantages and problems. One thing that keeps popping up is "dual-stack" networking, meaning (I believe) a host can speak both IPv4 and IPv6. I don't quite understand how this works, however. Can a host actually transmit using IPv4 and IPv6 at the same time over the same physical Ethernet (like e.g. HTTP and FTP can be used simultaneously)? Or is the physical network strictly IPv4 or IPv6, with the "other" protocol sent via tunneling?

    Read the article

  • Modify static variables while debugging in Eclipse

    - by sleske
    As an extension the the question "Modify/view static variables while debugging in Eclipse", I'd like to be able to modify static variables while debugging in Eclipse. For instance and local variables, I can just choose the variable in the "Variables" view of Eclipse, and use the context menu "Change value..." to change the value. This is not possible for arbitrary static variables, because they do not appear in the "Variables" view. What I tried: If you choose "Java / Show static variables" from the triangle menu in the "Variables" view, you can see and modify static member variables of the variables listed in the "Variables view". However, I did not find how to access a static member of a class whose instance does not appear in the "Variables view". You can of course enter a static member as an expression into the "Expression view" (using fully qualified name). Then you can see the value, but the "Expression view" does not have an option to modify the value (it does allow to modify members of an expression, but not the expression itself, even if the expression is a field). So, if I have a static variable like a boolean MyClass.disableAllBugs, is there a way to change MyClass.disableAllBugs during debugging? As an aside: I realize that even having public mutable static fields (i.e. mutable global variables) is very bad style. But some codebases have it, and then it's sometimes useful to modify it while debugging.

    Read the article

  • Do you put a super() call a the beginning of your constructors?

    - by sleske
    This is a question about coding style and recommended practices: As explained in the answers to the question unnecessary to put super() in constructor?, if you write a constructor for a class that is supposed to use the default (no-arg) constructor from the superclass, you may call super() at the beginning of your constructor: public MyClass(int parm){ super(); // leaving this out makes no difference // do stuff... } but you can also omit the call; the compiler will in both cases act as if the super() call were there. So then, do you put the call into your constructors or not? On the one hand, one might argue that including the super() makes things more explicit. OTOH, I always dislike writing redundant code, so personally I tend to leave it out; I do however regularly see it in code from others. What are your experiences? Did you have problems with one or the other approach? Do you have coding guidelines which prescribe one approach?

    Read the article

  • TDD: Write a separate test for object initialization or relying on other tests exercising it

    - by DXM
    This seems to be the common pattern that's emerging in some of the tests I've worked on lately. We have a class, and quite often this is legacy code whose design can't be easily altered, which has a bunch of member variables. There's some kind of "Initialize" or "Load" function which would put an object into a valid state. Only after it is initialized/loaded, are the members in the proper state so that other methods can be exercised. So when we start writing tests, first test is "TestLoad" and all we put in there is exercising initialization logic. Then we might add one (or few) TestLoadFailureXXX tests and those are definitely valuable. Then we start writing tests to verify other behaviors but all of them require the object to be loaded. So they all start by running exactly the same code as "TestLoad". So my question: Is TestLoad even necessary? Do you take it and let other tests simply exercise the loading? Or leave it so things are more explicit? I know that each unit test function should have no (or as little as possible) overlap with other test functions, but it seems like in cases of loading, this is unavoidable. And whether we like it or not, if something in the loading code breaks, we will end up with a whole test suite of failures. Is there another approach that I might be missing here? Thank you for the responses. It definitely makes sense that you want to see "InitializationTest" and if that fails you know where to start looking. In case it matters, this question is mostly about C++ and we use CppUnit framework. And now, thanks to sleske, I'll be constantly wishing that CppUnit supported test dependencies. Might have to hack something in one of these days :)

    Read the article

1