Name: Ingvar Mattsson
Member since: 2000-03-15 10:32:47
Last Login: 2009-07-03 09:12:38
Homepage: http://www.hexapodia.net/~ingvar/
Notes: About me? I'm not that interesting.
I run and occasionally build networks for a living. Sometimes I poke servers and make them happy or build fail-over clusters spanning multiple timezones.
I sometimes write code. Mostly in Common Lisp or C. I find things like "work flow services" interesting. It's probably a perversion, I guess. In my other spare time I read. Lots. Mostly SF and fantasy, but the occasional mainstream fiction or protocol spec manages to sneak in.
I like to cook, too.
In the end, it was a surprisingly simple fix, after "startx 2>&1 > trace-file" gave me the crucial bits of info. An expected symbol was not around in a dynamic linking stage and chasing that down gave a simple(ish) fix. All I had to do, in the end, was to uninstall the fglrx driver (something I installed in the first place to get working accelerated 3D primitives and direct rendering).
But, it did made me wonder, if the Xorg server can write to stderr, why can't it log the lack of a symbol to the og file? Maybe, I don't know, because that writing happens in a non-X library? I should probably have a poke at that, at some point.
18 Jun 2009 (updated 18 Jun 2009 at 08:51 UTC) »
17 Jun 2009 (updated 17 Jun 2009 at 11:41 UTC) »
Basically, in the case of the following:
(defun frob (x) (format t "Frob: ~a~%" x)) (frob (defun frob (x) (format t "New frob: ~a~%" x))does the printed line say "Frob" or "New frob"?
It is, I believe, fully specified what will happen when you do either of (funcall #'frob ...) or (funcall 'frob ...), but out of the two implementations I have tried (SBCL and CLisp), I have two different behaviours. SBCL prints "New frob" and CLisp prints "Frob".
I shall have to ponder this, for a bit, I think.
Two papers finished off, both declined to Conference #1, but now submitted for the consideration of Conference #2.
Two essays, on data structures and time complexity and electronic fora finished off.
The screen-scraper was constructed by using DRAKMA to fetch the pages and then some substring functions to extract the data I needed. Estimated 30 minutes of coding lisp and testing, then a further "lots" of actual scraping.
But, my main musing for today is something I've noticed recently, in my Apache logs. It seems as if there's an active business in "referring page" spam. I haven't run the numbers, but from eyeballing the logs, I am seeing at least a couple of page fetches per day, where the "referring page" field is several URLs that trigger my wetware "this is spam" detection. I wonder what the reasoning behind it is? Maybe they're banking on sites publishing their stats publicly?
ingvar certified others as follows:
Others have certified ingvar as follows:
[ Certification disabled because you're not logged in. ]
FOAF updates: Trust rankings are now exported, making the data available to other users and websites. An external FOAF URI has been added, allowing users to link to an additional FOAF file.
Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.
If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!