有錢劉的碎碎唸.

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:mozillateam/firefox-stable
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get upgrade

ref.

http://www.webupd8.org/2011/06/firefox-5-lands-in-firefox-stable-ppa.html

  CCLD   libpangoft2-1.0.la
  CC     pangoxft-font.lo
  CC     pangoxft-fontmap.lo
  CC     pangoxft-render.lo
  CCLD   libpangoxft-1.0.la
/bin/sed: can't read /usr/lib/libX11.la: No such file or directory
libtool: link: `/usr/lib/libX11.la' is not a valid libtool archive
make[4]: *** [libpangoxft-1.0.la] Error 1

Solution

# emerge -av dev-util/lafilefixer

# lafilefixer --justfixit

I experienced the same problem myself; fortunately, the solution is simple.  For some reason, the default value of some of the registry keys (not all) were changed in windows 7, which causes the system to apparently ignore the InitialKeyboardIndicators settings in the other locations.  All that is requireded is the performance of a search of the registry using regedit for that key.  It is important to use the find function to locate ALL keyboard keys forInitialKeyboardIndicators and set them to the same value setting.  The value options are as follows:

0 - Turn all indicators Off (NumLock, CapsLock, ScrollLock)
1 - Turn CapsLock On
2 - Turn NumLock On
3 - Turn CapsLock and NumLock On
4 - Turn ScrollLock On
5 - Turn CapsLock and ScrollLock On
6 - Turn NumLock and ScrollLock On
7 - Turn all indicators On (NumLock, CapsLock, ScrollLock)

In my case, the string value was some 7 or 8 digit number such as 21765430.  These entries are the cause of the reboot change in the num lock status.  If you want it on when you boot, set the string value to 2 in all the keys with numeric values.  Problem solved!

Ref

最近 Windows Live Message 出現了很煩人的廣告, 我是不介意免費的東西有廣告這件事.

不過當滑鼠經過上方的時候, 會自動跳出一個視窗播廣告是那招呀?

解決方案也很簡單,

編輯檔案(Windows 7) C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts

拿來產生 format 過的 Patch 很好用 .

還可以直接輸出到目錄.

ex:

$ git format-patch 7ef30fa2c707e59590dfe44c184cf0066747c0e8..e9623f0e67f6cbd1aeb8d3c6d5d2503c06d15d15 -o /data/output

這樣就可以產生完整的 patch 及說明

http://www.pengutronix.de/development/kernel/arm-benchmarks-20100702_en.html

Some quick tests of lmbench on a Sheevaplug: mcuelenaere@kot:/dev/shm/lmbench3/bin/armv5tel-linux-gnu$ ./lat_ops integer bit: 0.85 nanoseconds integer add: 0.02 nanoseconds integer mul: 0.42 nanoseconds integer div: 147.77 nanoseconds integer mod: 36.94 nanoseconds int64 bit: 1.71 nanoseconds int64 add: 0.04 nanoseconds int64 mul: 0.92 nanoseconds int64 div: 425.89 nanoseconds int64 mod: 273.85 nanoseconds float add: 36.25 nanoseconds float mul: 30.32 nanoseconds float div: 161.29 nanoseconds double add: 51.21 nanoseconds double mul: 46.31 nanoseconds double div: 542.06 nanoseconds float bogomflops: 325.59 nanoseconds double bogomflops: 799.14 nanoseconds mcuelenaere@kot:/dev/shm/lmbench3/bin/armv5tel-linux-gnu$ mbw 128 Long uses 4 bytes. Allocating 2*33554432 elements = 268435456 bytes of memory. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test. Getting down to business... Doing 10 runs per test. 0 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.48203 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 265.546 MiB/s 1 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.48165 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 265.751 MiB/s 2 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.48163 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 265.764 MiB/s 3 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.49714 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 257.473 MiB/s 4 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.48168 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 265.737 MiB/s 5 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.48163 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 265.764 MiB/s 6 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.49695 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 257.570 MiB/s 7 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.48196 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 265.579 MiB/s 8 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.48164 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 265.761 MiB/s 9 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.49695 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 257.570 MiB/s AVG Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.48633 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 263.198 MiB/s 0 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.29804 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 429.475 MiB/s 1 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.29807 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 429.429 MiB/s 2 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.29815 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 429.310 MiB/s 3 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.29800 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 429.530 MiB/s 4 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.31337 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 408.458 MiB/s 5 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.29805 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 429.462 MiB/s 6 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.29808 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 429.411 MiB/s 7 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.29801 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 429.510 MiB/s 8 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.29809 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 429.403 MiB/s 9 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.31339 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 408.437 MiB/s AVG Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30113 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 425.072 MiB/s 0 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.21906 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 584.317 MiB/s 1 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.21554 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 593.852 MiB/s 2 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.21577 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 593.238 MiB/s 3 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.21671 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 590.646 MiB/s 4 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.21479 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 595.942 MiB/s 5 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23519 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 544.232 MiB/s 6 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.21705 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 589.734 MiB/s 7 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.59684 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 214.464 MiB/s 8 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.21699 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 589.889 MiB/s 9 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.21418 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 597.642 MiB/s AVG Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.25621 MiB: 128.00000 Copy: 499.589 MiB/s Couldn't get lat_ctx to work. mcuelenaere@kot:/dev/shm/lmbench3/bin/armv5tel-linux-gnu$ ./lat_syscall open Simple open/close: 7.2754 microseconds mcuelenaere@kot:/dev/shm/lmbench3/bin/armv5tel-linux-gnu$ ./lat_syscall open /dev/shm/lmbench3.tar Simple open/close: 6.9399 microseconds mcuelenaere@kot:/dev/shm/lmbench3/bin/armv5tel-linux-gnu$ ./lat_proc fork Process fork+exit: 763.5714 microseconds mcuelenaere@kot:/dev/shm/lmbench3/bin/armv5tel-linux-gnu$ cat /proc/cpuinfo Processor : Feroceon 88FR131 rev 1 (v5l) BogoMIPS : 1192.75 Features : swp half thumb fastmult edsp CPU implementer : 0x56 CPU architecture: 5TE CPU variant : 0x2 CPU part : 0x131 CPU revision : 1 Hardware : Marvell SheevaPlug Reference Board Revision : 0000 Serial : 0000000000000000 I'm not sure if I'm doing this right, but it looks like the Sheevaplug beats all ARM chips (except on FP) on the tests done at [1]. Looks like these tests heavily depend on the clock frequency. 

Performance and compatibility issues with Shared Folders in Parallels Desktop build 9344

Parallels 內裝的是 Windows XP, 裝 Office 2010

從 Office 2003 移 .pst 檔給 2010 用的時候. 

會出現 Office 存取錯誤, 或是像是如下的錯誤

這樣的故事應該天天都在上演

主管: "你去移除 Max Payne 2 的保護"
員工: "這個 source code 要去那邊下載呀"
主管: "這邊有份文件, 你照做就好了"

[過了二天]
員工: "我照作了, 可是還是沒有辦法 compile 出來, 我環境都弄成一樣了"
主管: "我找到一份文件叫離職交接, 你看看有沒有可以用的資訊"
[二小時後]
員工: "幹! 電話是 0800-119119"
主管: "我不管, Stream 叫我們三天後要交出 binary, 要不然無法上架, 你三天內要弄出來無 CD 保護的版本, 而且要測試過"
員工: "..................."

[三天後]
員工: "我弄好了, 移除了保護, 也試過可以玩了....."
主管: "Good, 做的非常好, 我就說嘛, 只要我們相信, 我們就可以做到......... "