Comments for still don't have a title

Comment on How to get the most precise time, comparable between processes in Python? by Daniele

Daniele — Wed, 15 May 2013 19:35:05 +0000

Unfortunately the Windows timing system is crap. There is no reliable way to access a global timer with resolution higher than ~10 ms and this is not a Python fault. Not event the maintainers of NTP have found a way to do it. One possible solution is to synchronize the performance counter with the system clock. A way to do that is a busy loop querying the system clock and the performance counter and wait for the system clock to tick: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163996.aspx However, there is no guarantee that the performance counter frequency does not change in time. A reliable implementation becomes quite messy…

Comment on How to get the most precise time, comparable between processes in Python? by Jim

Jim — Wed, 15 May 2013 16:33:43 +0000

Run a third process that listens for UDP packets and responds with its current value of time.clock(). Your two processes can either use this as a one-time thing to configure their own time.clock() offset, or they can just send a packet whenever they want a timestamp. On my machine, something like “ping localhost” gives response times of 80 microseconds, so the network stack is certainly fast enough to meet your timing requirements.

Comment on How to get the most precise time, comparable between processes in Python? by Jakub Ziembinski

Jakub Ziembinski — Wed, 15 May 2013 11:16:12 +0000

Have you tried enabling HPET both in BIOS and Windows? http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1075781-tweak-enable-hpet-in-bios-and-os-for-better-performance-and-fps/

Comment on Wee! Wheezy is out (better late than never) by Alien1it

Alien1it — Sat, 11 May 2013 12:41:18 +0000

Thanks to all Debian contributors for Wheezy e for next future release.

Comment on Shiny new iPod Nano 6G… fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu by Bastian

Bastian — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:32:22 +0000

As mentioned in my post — this is not an option for users who don’t trust the binary (which comes without the source code!).

Also I tested in in a virtual machine and it does not work correctly. The lib is loaded but I still cannot fill the device with music. If I do the data base is corrupted and the ipod seems to be empty.

I really wish we had the algorithm for the hash so someone could implement a proper library.

Comment on Shiny new iPod Nano 6G… fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu by Joel

Joel — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:50:09 +0000

It works in Banshee Ubuntu 12.04!!!

1. Install libgpod4_0.8.2 and libgpod-common_0.8.2 from http://franck78.ath.cx/

2. Downloaded libhashab.so and in root mode place it in /usr/lib/libgpod and put all permisions to read and write.

3. Enjoy

Comment on Synchronizing Google Mail Contacts with Thunderbird by Bastian

Bastian — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:41:14 +0000

Zindus looks promising, didn’t delete one contact so far

Since the auto-sync intervals are very long, I hope it does some intelligent merging instead of replacing the older version with the newer one, just in case you happen to modify the same contact on Thunderbird and your cell phone within one day.

Comment on Synchronizing Google Mail Contacts with Thunderbird by Bastian

Bastian — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:39:00 +0000

Sogo didn’t work for me at all. I installed the connector, setup the remote address book — but nothing happened. Didn’t even ask for my password. The Sync-option is just disabled.

Comment on Synchronizing Google Mail Contacts with Thunderbird by rupi

rupi — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:36:15 +0000

sogo connector works pretty well, tested it with several servers. as a bonus it improves lightning as well (it has a pretty good webdav backend)

http://www.sogo.nu/downloads/frontends.html

/rupi

Comment on Synchronizing Google Mail Contacts with Thunderbird by Evgeni

Evgeni — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:28:31 +0000

+1 for zindus. Works fine here too. No support for postal adresses though.