The goal is to export an FMU to be run on a target machine without a Dymola license. Do I always need a specific license?
Without enabling the code export options in the license setup, all FMU types (me, cs, all, csSolver) seem to require a Dymola installation on the target machine.
Somehow I had it different in mind. Also, from the Dymola Manual 2B, 1.1.2 Exporting FMUs from Dymola I understand that Binary Model Export license is only required when trying to export an FMU of type csSolver.
To export an FMU that does not require a Dymola license key on the target computer, you always need one of the code export options. You pay for the capability, not for the embedded solver.
Related
Apparently, modules (loadable and built-in) are stored in the
/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/modules.builtin
directory. According to different topics, you need to recompile the kernel if you want to change a built in module. I would like to know what would happen if I replaced a .ko module in the
/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/modules.builtin
directory.
Thank you.
In IntelliJ IDEA -> Preferences, under Tools / Python Integrated Tools you can set, on a per-module basis, your Docstring format. (This allows you to choose between reStructuredText, NumPy, EpyText, Google and plain formats.) Is there a way to set a default for the entire IDE? Or at least for the entire project? Or are you constrained to setting it on each module individually?
There is an open request for this, please vote:
PY-20243 " Default Settings" dialog in Idea does not have "Python Integrated Tools" settings
I'm using buildroot to create a linux system for raspberry pi. I want to use the initramfs to enable to system to self-patch. The procedure roughly runs as follows:
Raspi boots, kernel loads initramfs
The initramfs-system (which contains busybox, zsync etc.) connects to a central server and checks if there are boot-file updates available (e.g. a new kernel)
If not, it checks if there is a system update available and downloads that if needed
The downloaded (squashfs) system image is mounted and executed via switch_root
My problem is that I need to compile a secondary busybox (and some more packages) for the initramfs which do not belong in the main system. I currently solved this by manually tinkering with the package files to install into target/initramfs, moving this folder out with pre-build and back in again with post-build, but this seems rather hacky. Additionally, different package types require different types of changes. Is there a better solution to this problem? If one could for example manually overwrite the target directory for each package, this problem would be rather easy to solve.
Create two separate buildroot configurations.
One configuration will have the kernel and the initramfs.
The other configuration only has the squashfs rootfs.
Creating a partial rootfs from a configuration is very tricky, because you have to be sure that you don't miss any shared libraries or other auxiliary files needed by some program.
Note that to speed up the build, you can use ccache and/or use an external toolchain. See the manual.
I want to use AMPL student version.
also I apply its IDE for mathematical modelling, but when I open it, it pop-up a box showing the following message.
A valid AMPL license file could not be found for this machine.
For assistance, copy this entire message and send it to licensing#ampl.com.
Details:
License file ampl.lic not found anywhere in $PATH.
What can I do to fix this issue?
The AMPL IDE distribution available for download from http://www.ampl.com/IDE/ includes a full version of ampl which requires a license. To use the student version, you need to replace the ampl and solver binaries in the amplide/ampl directory with their student versions available here.
Alternatively, you can download a demo version of the IDE from one of the following locations:
Linux: http://ampl.com/dl/demo/amplide-demo-linux32.tar.gz
OS X: http://ampl.com/dl/demo/amplide-demo-macosx.tar.gz
Windows: http://ampl.com/dl/demo/amplide-demo-mswin.zip
Simply place the amplide folder inside the amplcml folder (which is the free student version of AMPL).
Hoping to have some Eclipse PDE guru's weigh in here in a problem I'm having trouble solving.
I am attempting export (via PDE UI) a feature that has two fragments included where both fragments target the same os (e.g., Linux) but have different architecture values (e.g., x86 and x86_64). Each fragment has their own copy of several .so library files, which were built on the either Linux x86 or Linux x86 64 bit. For example:
FragmentA (os=Linux,arch=x86)
lib1.so
lib2.so
lib3.so
FragmentB (os=Linux,arch=x86_64)
lib1.so
lib2.so
lib3.so
Exporting the hosting feature with using the corresponding delta pack to select either linux (gtk/x86) OR linux (gtk/x86_64), the export works as expected. However, when I select BOTH platforms, the export fails with the following message:
Processing inclusion from feature com.sample.feature:
Bundle com.sample.linux.x86_64_1.0.0.qualifier failed to resolve.:
Unsatisfied native code filter:
lib1.so; lib2.so; lib3.so; processor=x86_64; osname=linux.
Why can't I export both fragments together? I also have a Win32 x86 fragment that I can export with the linux X86 feature but instead of having .so files, it has .dll files with the same file titles (e.g., lib1.dll, lib2.dll, lib3.dll).
Could having .so library files named the same in the two Linux-based fragments cause this issue?
Any help would be much appreciated as this is a critical block to our build process (both manually via the UI and headlessly).