text stringlengths 1 330k |
|---|
1 Answer |
up vote 3 down vote accepted |
"0x116 offset" means nothing. It could be a value that needs to be added to words or subtracted to remove some naive encoding, or anything else for that matter. |
Could you post a part of the file? Is it binary or text? Could you define "mostly not"? |
What vendor/software package/device does this file come from? |
share|improve this answer |
add comment |
Your Answer |
Take the tour × |
Our applications use lot of custom built and third party libraries and right now each application has a private reference to these assemblies which means that the bin folder of each of these applications has the referenced assemblies copied. For e.g. Application A references log4net.dll, CustomLibA.dll, CustomLibB.dll ... |
D:\Inetpub\wwwroot\ApplicationA\bin D:\Inetpub\wwwroot\ApplicationB\bin |
I have the following questions about this arrangement: |
1. I think this will create performance issues as the number of applications and the references grows, because, every application will load all these assemblies which will result in virtual address fragmentation. Is my assumption right? |
2. Can I organize the applications such that all these applications reference the assemblies from a common folder and doesn't have a private copy in the bin folder? For e.g. the assemblies log4net.dll, CustomLibA.dll, CustomLibB.dll are organized in the following folder |
and reference by the applications which are organized as follows: |
D:\Inetpub\wwwroot\Apps\ApplicationA D:\Inetpub\wwwroot\Apps\ApplicationB |
The bin folder within these applications will not have the common assemblies. |
Will this work? I tried to do this by setting copy local to false, but I get 'Could not load file or assembly xxxx'. |
I know that I can use GAC, but I want to avoid GAC for certain custom built libraries due to the nature of our deployment process. |
Thanks, Hari Krishnan. |
share|improve this question |
A good reference for these things are the first 3 chapters of CLR via C# – Tom Ritter May 28 '09 at 22:11 |
add comment |
3 Answers |
up vote 0 down vote accepted |
There may be added benefits to performance and code sharing if you use the GAC. Note that having all apps refer to a common shared path will not alter the fact that each application will be loading its own copy of the assemblies into memory. |
The only benefit that a shared path will give you is not having to deploy multiple copies of these assemblies. |
share|improve this answer |
Though this doesn't answer both of my questions, jerryjvl does answered the first questions. Thanks. – Tech Matrix May 29 '09 at 17:36 |
add comment |
you can always add other paths for the appdomain to look for references in other folders rather than bin or gac. |
share|improve this answer |
depends on what framework you're using as well AppDomain.CurrentDomain.AppendPrivatePath(path) and AppDomainSetup adSetup = new AppDomainSetup(); adSetup.PrivateBinPath = path – Brandon Grossutti May 28 '09 at 22:13 |
add comment |
I think the GAC is your best bet for common class libraries. You can still have custom libraries deployed to the local \bin directory. |
share|improve this answer |
As long as the assemblies are strongly named. – Max Schmeling May 28 '09 at 22:32 |
I agree GAC is the best place for sharing. And we are having the thrid party libraries installed in GAC. But certain custom built libraries undergo couple of releases in a month and deploying it in GAC will be cumbersome due to our deployment process. – Tech Matrix May 29 '09 at 17:34 |
add comment |
Your Answer |
Beginning of article |
A somewhat obscure international commission--the Codex Alimentarius Commission--that sets food safety guidelines based on science has recently become another arena for trade disputes. Arguments about scientific uncertainties relating to food safety and efforts to bring non-scientific concerns into the consultations thr... |
The Codex Alimentarius Commission is an international organization virtually unknown to the general public. Nevertheless, while Codex works in the shadow of more prominent U.N. organizations, the impact of its work is felt by consumers everyday. The name "Codex Alimentarius" itself explains the general purpose of the C... |
The Codex Alimentarius was established in 1962 as a cooperative program by the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO), and currently has over 160 countries as members. Its mission is to set international food standards that help governments to achieve adequate co... |
Currently, countries' delegations to the Codex Alimentarius consist of government officials but can also include industry or consumer representatives, as well as academic experts. The committees currently cover nine general subject areas, such as food labeling, and 13 commodities, such as meat, fish, and milk products.... |
How Food Standards Are Approved. Initially a proposal to develop a new food standard is submitted to the Codex Commission by either a government or a Codex subsidiary. The Commission or the executive committee then decides whether the proposal should proceed. A list of formal criteria helps to guide the Commission in i... |
After the Commission determines that a new standard is needed, a proposed draft standard is prepared and circulated among the members for comments. After consideration of comments, a draft standard is then presented to the Commission, and, if adopted by the Commission, is then sent to the governments. The process may i... |
Click photo to enlarge |
In this film image released by Warner Bros, Zac Efron is shown in a scene from "The Lucky One." (AP Photo/Warner Bros.) |
Dear Nicholas: |
I was going to email you, then realized -- d'oh -- you're a man of letters. At least that's what I got out of your last movie, "Dear John." |
Anyway, I'm sending some thoughts your way about your new one that's getting the Hollywood treatment, "The Lucky One," based on another one of your best-sellers. |
While I appreciate you making a few tweaks to the Nicholas Sparks formula, the end product still ends up being just another warmed-over casserole -- with garbanzo beans swapped out for pintos, or, in this case, Zac Efron for Channing Tatum, Taylor Schilling for Rachel McAdams (all of them much better-looking than beans... |
Don't get me wrong. I love to cry at the movies, and in the past you've done a bang-up job of making me blubber like a fool. You all but destroyed me with "The Notebook," especially that Gena Rowlands-James Garner finale. Even the minor-leaguer "Dear John" made me misty-eyed. |
But, "The Lucky One" left me stone cold. |
So rather than stew about it, I decided to overshare my feelings with you about where I thought "Lucky" went wrong as a film. And, to be fair, let you know a few times the filmmakers got it right. |
So, let's start with the bad. |
1. Zac Efron. No matter how buff he gets and how hot he looks in black boxer briefs, he's not ready to be a leading man. Earnestness is one thing, over-earnestness becomes downright annoying. As Logan, a returning Marine who takes a walk to remember from Colorado to Louisiana in search of Beth -- a gorgeous woman in a ... |
2. The contrivances. It's silly that Logan never reveals to Beth Schilling) why he's come to the dog kennel that she and her kooky but sweet granny (Blythe Danner) run. After a couple of false starts of trying, why doesn't he just blurt out the truth -- that her picture saved his life a couple of times while serving in... |
3. The evil ex: To put a wedge in the romance, enter the evil ex. Boo! Hiss! Vilify! And boy, did screenwriter Will Fetters make Keith (Jay R. Ferguson) despicable -- abusive, manipulative, menacing and saddled with daddy issues. |
And yet at one point, the noble Logan calls Beth's ex "a good man" when he's drunk and threatening him. Really? I mean, really? |
4. The sentimental dialogue: Here's one example. Beth: "You think life has a plan for you?" Logan: "If so, it hasn't shared it with me yet." Oh, brother. |
OK. OK. The film's not a total wash. Here's what did work. |
1. Schilling. The relative newcomer lights up the screen, even when the film requires histrionics. |
2. The cinematography: So gorgeous, I couldn't help but wonder if the Louisiana Tourism Board bankrolled the film. |
3. The sex scene: No denying this is steamy hot, and pushes the PG-13 back up against the wall. |
4. Blythe Danner: She can dodder with the best of them, and the veteran actress classes things up, just as Richard Jenkins did in "Dear John" and Rowlands and Garner did in "Notebook." |
Yes, she's delightful, Nicholas, and that's the problem: We're becoming too well-versed in your shtick. |
Next time, mix it up more, futz with your famous formula. Then maybe saps like me will be the lucky ones. |
'The Lucky one' |
* ½ |
Rating: PG-13 (some sexuality and violence) |
Director: Scott Hicks |
Running time: 1 hour, 41 minutes |
Bits from the NM people |
Hello world, |
during this weekend FD/DAM had a meeting in Essen to discuss various |
things and issues around the New Maintainer process. |
Good news |
The queues are (almost) empty: |
* The DAM queue has only 2 people left. 14 have been approved and |
will now get an account. |
* Yes, this really means that we're going to have 14 new DDs as soon |
as their accounts are created! |
* The two people currently in the DAM queue are waiting for issues |
not fully related to the NM process that should be dealt with in |
the next few days. |
* The frontdesk queue is empty! |
* There are only 3 people waiting to get an AM assigned. With a few |
more AMs we could reach the ideal situation of having the AM queue |
empty and the AMs not overworking. |
* There are various people on hold at the DAM or the FD stage. These |
have all been pinged, and will either move on, or their |
application will be cancelled. |
No more rejections! |
Canceling an application is currently called a "rejection". We are |
actually very rarely rejecting people from Debian, and the most common |
case is that an application is canceled because a person is not ready, |
and is invited to join again after they gain some experience. This |
wording issue has causes bad feelings in the past. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.