truefusion

I don't recall ever using it though it is possible that i've used a front-end that uses it and i didn't know it.

If you're going to install two distros, then by what i said it will be: 2 root, 1 home, 1 swap, and whatever else you want—just add 1 to root for every other distro. The only thing i've experienced with having different distros accessing the same home directory was that some change the group or some other directory setting. Normally, this is not really a problem, but from experience Fedora and Ubuntu don't seem to play well together in this area—though that may have changed since the last time i tried Fedora. Normally, whatever is installed in /boot is unaffected by any system crashes. Keeping /boot separate means you can uninstall the distros and still be able to boot the system with GRUB (or LILO). But keeping /boot separate means each may try to overwrite things in /boot. Some distros allow you to skip the installation of the boot loader, but some may not. I've only ever had one distro installed at a time, so i am uncertain of any conflicts that may occur by separating /boot and by not separating it.

So... What's the game about? It's hard to work with just the name.

Trap17 hosted accounts do not have access to the php.ini file do to the fact that this is shared hosting. mahesh most likely has paid hosting that allows him to access his own php.ini file. Also, using ini_set() won't work, since the file would be uploaded before ini_set() gets called. However, the path for "upload_tmp_dir," by default, is empty anyway, which means PHP is relying on other information. Hmm? "meinterest"? You've just reminded me of something:<?php echo $_ENV['TMPDIR']; ?>Guess where that points to. web_designer, is that the path of your account's tmp folder (run the code first)? Xisto's cPanel username can only have a maximum of 8 characters, which means "meinterest" becomes "meintere". For security reasons, users are not allowed to access the directory of other users. This may explain why PHP declares the folder is missing. However, that doesn't explain why anyone who has access to that folder would receive that error—and, in fact, contradicts it.

PHP has a function for stripping HTML from a string: strip_tags(). Use it for every _GET variable you output to the browser. Or you can just have this at the beginning of the script: $_GET = array_map("strip_tags", $_GET);

Separating /boot isn't really necessary, but separating /home is wise. The root partition normally doesn't need more than 15gbs of space. If you are going to be putting more than one Linux distro on the same hard drive, then you are going to want to use an extended partition and then divide that into logical partitions for distros to fit in (for their / directory).

It is a problem on the server's side and cannot be programmatically fixed through PHP, and uploading any file through any PHP script won't currently work, at least on those hosted on the gamma server.

Served pages have a similar structure to that of e-mails. Headers are always supposed to come first before the page's content is received. The "headers already sent" message is due to the script echoing (or printing) information before sending headers. Recheck the structure of your code and make sure setcookie comes before all echos and prints.

I suppose in some important areas you have filtered the input, but you seem to have forgotten about $_GET. I haven't tried all the pages, but this page allows for arbitrary HTML (don't worry, it is just Google :angel:—but it could have been worse).

I'm not sure what kind of business is being ran here, but a business computer, in general, doesn't require all of that stuff. But concerning the motherboard, i've owned and still own ASUS and Gigabyte motherboards and have never had a problem with them. Gigabyte was slightly easier to use, but ASUS seemed to have a bit more options. But it is a bit weird that you mention Indian markets. PCI Express is backwards compatible. Gaming within the office? Are we talking about a home office? Even so, a 5000 series or anything around that much power from any company is exaggerating, even if you are planning on playing high-end games. You can easily go with a decent 4000 series and play most high-end games on their high settings.

Check the capacitors (the things that look like tiny batteries) on the graphics card and see if any of them have popped. A similar thing happened to my old graphics card before it died. Its last breath was a display similar to the ever-so-common Matrix screen saver.

After doing more research (i.e. grep-ing WordPress :angel:), WordPress relies on the errors given from PHP when handling file upload errors. If the folder had been found and the file could not be written to the temporary directory, i would have expected PHP to return UPLOAD_ERR_CANT_WRITE (turns out ~/tmp has 0755 permissions). Since PHP is the one returning the error to WordPress, then, yeah, it does seem like it is on the server's side. By the way, editing the php.ini file requires the server to be restarted in order for changes to take effect (at least that is what i can derive from here). For that reason ini_set() should be used. So unless you can restart Apache from your end, editing php.ini is almost futile. By the way, the WordPress file i pointed to in my previous post, it seems, was not the file that was supposed to be edited. I'm not sure which one might help, but maybe wp-admin/includes/file.php or wp-admin/includes/import.php.

Following from the sources you provided and assuming this is where the problem indeed lies, i come across wp-includes/Text/Diff.php after some extra research. Here's the code that WordPress 2.9.2 uses to retrieve the temporary upload directory: function _getTempDir() { $tmp_locations = array('/tmp', '/var/tmp', 'c:\WUTemp', 'c:\temp', 'c:\windows\temp', 'c:\winnt\temp'); /* Try PHP's upload_tmp_dir directive. */ $tmp = ini_get('upload_tmp_dir'); /* Otherwise, try to determine the TMPDIR environment variable. */ if (!strlen($tmp)) { $tmp = getenv('TMPDIR'); } /* If we still cannot determine a value, then cycle through a list of * preset possibilities. */ while (!strlen($tmp) && count($tmp_locations)) { $tmp_check = array_shift($tmp_locations); if (@is_dir($tmp_check)) { $tmp = $tmp_check; } } /* If it is still empty, we have failed, so return false; otherwise * return the directory determined. */ return strlen($tmp) ? $tmp : false; }If ini_get() is returning something presumably useful, then you may want to consider overwriting upload_tmp_dir with ini_set(). This would, of course, require editing the Diff.php file. Have upload_tmp_dir point to your tmp directory above your public_html directory. If this doesn't help, then you'll have to continue your research.

Unless you are thinking about having a script generate a thumbnail for the site, then it is not a complicated thing. Just repeat the process done for these thumbnails. Only difference being is that you would be updating (overwriting) the image on your hosted account. This issue has been prevalent (and has been reported) for a long time now, but apparently staff members can access those attachments without any problem. But the image it links to is actually bigger than your thumbnail, but only in height. The forum script has just so happened to have reduced the thumbnail of the thumbnail by 20%.

Concerning the thumbnail: since a website's layout may change over time, can it be allowed to host our own thumbnail, provide you the URL of the thumbnail and you just use that as the image's source? In that way, whenever we change the layout the thumbnail can accurately display the website's current look.

I see. Since "knowledge" is pretty much the main keyword, following from the one you had, how about, then, the following: "An adventure in the field of knowledge"? I could probably come up with something else if i take the time to.

Ah, okay, i think i'm starting to understand Xisto more now. This should be interesting. Anyway, my website's domain is http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

Wouldn't that make the forums appear like one that is more centered on philosophy than what it is now—a general forum?

So after trying to replace the ATI drivers that are now enabled by default for those with ATI cards (which have horrible HD video performance and probably other issues) with the proprietary ATI drivers (which don't have any apparent issues), it has prevented the X server from loading, so i reinstalled the system (Kubuntu 10.04 Beta 1) this time using unetbootin. :angel: I've finally figured out how get the installer to install the kernel (without having to unmount /cdrom—this is what prevented it from installing the kernel) so that GRUB picks it up. And i have not experienced any RTC data corruption (though all of this has caused Windows to display the wrong time). However, the new installer for Kubuntu lags a lot. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LucidReleaseSchedule

The "after-boot performance" is normally the user's fault, due to the programs they have auto-start upon logging in. But i normally uninstall the ones i don't need that come pre-installed on the system (e.g. bluetooth support). Personally, i would like to be able to reach the desktop as fast as possible just for the sake of reaching it fast. Not really interested in wasting time waiting for things to load. 3.6; and, yes, compiling Firefox is really annoying (though i would just download the pre-compiled version). Seems about the same. File managers and the like are still able to access these drives, just, apparently, not through HAL anymore. I've only ever heard of HAL, so i'm not sure what they're using now. I wouldn't call it radical, nor a "feature," but some GUI changes have been made, some of which have been voted against (like the window buttons being the left like in Mac OS). But i should mention i didn't install GNOME (though the window buttons change is for Ubuntu and not Kubuntu).

I would have expected it to have started acting at that time if it were do to the hard drive replacement. Personally, i would just check for dust; maybe reopen the case and dust things out. I wouldn't say that is uncommon. It's the name he gave his laptop (well, assuming it was him).

So the first beta is supposed to be out today. I normally switch to the new ones around this time—which i have already done so. As some of you may know, one of the goals of this version is to decrease the amount of time it takes for the system to boot up yet again, the goal being no more than 10 seconds on a "medium system." According to their website removing HAL is one of the things that will accomplish this goal. That caught me a bit by surprise since HAL concerns hardware, like CD-ROM drives, USB, et cetera. But the system is still capable of accessing these things.So, has Canonical accomplished their goal of booting up the system of about twice as fast as the previous version? Yes, they have! And it boots up incredibly fast on my system! Within a few seconds i am met with the display manager (KDM in my case)! Sometimes i don't even see the Ubuntu logo due to how fast the boot time is, which is a bit of a shame, too, since that new logo is looking pretty nice. I'm not sure what these people did, but so far they are accomplishing everything they set out to do. The question is, do they know beforehand that they can accomplish it and then tell the world, or do they set a goal and hope to accomplish it?Whatever the case, for anyone looking to upgrade at this point, i don't recommend it. I installed the system through a netboot installation: this downloads everything from Ubuntu's repository allowing to install the system without needing a CD, DVD or USB drive, just an internet connection. It could be just the netboot installer being slightly faulty at this point, but when the installer tried to update the hardware clock, it seems to have corrupted some data in it which prevented me from using my ethernet port. This was easily fixed, though, by clearing the CMOS data (messing around with the jumpers). But for that reason i don't recommend people to upgrade at this time.

Here's my entry (trying something different):

Currently, there is "no way" to "prove" life after death, as this is something that the individual has to experience themselves, although the topic on cryonics and reviving a person after officially being declared dead can be taken as life after death—but that is not necessarily to the extent that we are suggesting. Indeed, if it were absolutely true that there is no life after death, then studies to try and preserve and revive life are all done in vain. There are obviously only two outcomes here for life after death: either there is or there isn't. If there is, then you'll know and therefore it would have been proven to everyone (since death is inevitable); if there isn't, then no one will know it. While the latter introduces a small paradox as far as proof is concerned, the paradox can be avoided if there is life after death. Stating that things are your opinion is a bit irrelevant given to what has already been said. You have already mentioned that the reason why you spoke about death is to try and prove your position.[*] (anwiii may have skimmed over that part) When you try to prove something it goes beyond any opinion and attempts to enter a world that is objective, and when within the public domain may be subject to scrutiny.

However, as mentioned before, loss of memory is not evidence for not pre-existing. The argument from loss of memory allows for life beyond (i.e. before and after) the physical self. You have to now show that this is not possible, not only assert it. However, you've never died before. You're still living (by the way you define "living," i assume), right? Your presupposition is that life is limited to the physical self (like many i have come across). You could probably argue that you have no reason to go beyond the physical self, but neither have you provided any reason for us not to. There is no denying that no one's physical self has lived before they were conceived, and whether or not people at the stage of development are nothing (due to lack of a brain) i won't say, but, as you have mentioned, you are trying to prove that there is no life beyond the physical self, to which you have only rhetorically asserted.