Search Results

Search found 34827 results on 1394 pages for 'method groups'.

Page 195/1394 | < Previous Page | 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202  | Next Page >

  • Obscure SPUtility.SendMail Behavior When Manually Passing in Mail Headers

    - by Damon
    There are two ways to send mail in SharePoint: you can either use the mail components from the System.Net namespace, or you can send email using SharePoint's SPUtility.SendMail method.  One of the benefits of the SPUtility.SendMail method is that it uses the mail configuration from SharePoint, so you can manage settings in Central Administration instead of having to go through and modify your web.config file.  SPUtility.SendMail can get the job done, but it's defiantly not as developer friendly as the components from the System.Net namespace.  If you want to CC someone on an email, for example, you do NOT have a nice CC parameter - you have to manually add the CC mail header and pass it into the SPUtility.SendMail method.  I had to do this the other day, and ran into a really obscure issue. If you do NOT pass the headers into the method then SharePoint sends the email using the From Address configured in the Outgoing Mail settings in Central Admin.  If you pass headers into the method, but do not include the from header, then SharePoint sends the mail using the email address of the current user. This can be an issue if your mail server is setup to reject an email from an invalid email address or an email address that is not on your domain.  The way to fix this issue is to always pass in the from header.  If you want to use the configured From address, then you can do the following: SPWebApplication webApp = SPWebApplication.Lookup(new Uri(SPContext.Current.Site.Url)); StringDictionary headers = new StringDictionary(); headers.Add("from", webApp.OutboundMailSenderAddress);

    Read the article

  • Zenoss Setup for Windows Servers

    - by Jay Fox
    Recently I was saddled with standing up Zenoss for our enterprise.  We're running about 1200 servers, so manually touching each box was not an option.  We use LANDesk for a lot of automated installs and patching - more about that later.The steps below may not necessarily have to be completed in this order - it's just the way I did it.STEP ONE:Setup a standard AD user.  We want to do this so there's minimal security exposure.  Call the account what ever you want "domain/zenoss" for our examples.***********************************************************STEP TWO:Make the following local groups accessible by your zenoss account.Distributed COM UsersPerformance Monitor UsersEvent Log Readers (which doesn't exist on pre-2008 machines)Here's the Powershell script I used to setup access to these local groups:# Created to add Active Directory account to local groups# Must be run from elevated prompt, with permissions on the remote machine(s).# Create txt file should contain the names of the machines that need the account added, one per line.# Script will process machines line by line.foreach($i in (gc c:\tmp\computers.txt)){# Add the user to the first group$objUser=[ADSI]("WinNT://domain/zenoss")$objGroup=[ADSI]("WinNT://$i/Distributed COM Users")$objGroup.PSBase.Invoke("Add",$objUser.PSBase.Path)# Add the user to the second group$objUser=[ADSI]("WinNT://domain/zenoss")$objGroup=[ADSI]("WinNT://$i/Performance Monitor Users")$objGroup.PSBase.Invoke("Add",$objUser.PSBase.Path)# Add the user to the third group - Group doesn't exist on < Server 2008#$objUser=[ADSI]("WinNT://domain/zenoss")#$objGroup=[ADSI]("WinNT://$i/Event Log Readers")#$objGroup.PSBase.Invoke("Add",$objUser.PSBase.Path)}**********************************************************STEP THREE:Setup security on the machines namespace so our domain/zenoss account can access itThe default namespace for zenoss is:  root/cimv2Here's the Powershell script:#Grant account defined below (line 11) access to WMI Namespace#Has to be run as account with permissions on remote machinefunction get-sid{Param ($DSIdentity)$ID = new-object System.Security.Principal.NTAccount($DSIdentity)return $ID.Translate( [System.Security.Principal.SecurityIdentifier] ).toString()}$sid = get-sid "domain\zenoss"$SDDL = "A;;CCWP;;;$sid" $DCOMSDDL = "A;;CCDCRP;;;$sid"$computers = Get-Content "c:\tmp\computers.txt"foreach ($strcomputer in $computers){    $Reg = [WMIClass]"\\$strcomputer\root\default:StdRegProv"    $DCOM = $Reg.GetBinaryValue(2147483650,"software\microsoft\ole","MachineLaunchRestriction").uValue    $security = Get-WmiObject -ComputerName $strcomputer -Namespace root/cimv2 -Class __SystemSecurity    $converter = new-object system.management.ManagementClass Win32_SecurityDescriptorHelper    $binarySD = @($null)    $result = $security.PsBase.InvokeMethod("GetSD",$binarySD)    $outsddl = $converter.BinarySDToSDDL($binarySD[0])    $outDCOMSDDL = $converter.BinarySDToSDDL($DCOM)    $newSDDL = $outsddl.SDDL += "(" + $SDDL + ")"    $newDCOMSDDL = $outDCOMSDDL.SDDL += "(" + $DCOMSDDL + ")"    $WMIbinarySD = $converter.SDDLToBinarySD($newSDDL)    $WMIconvertedPermissions = ,$WMIbinarySD.BinarySD    $DCOMbinarySD = $converter.SDDLToBinarySD($newDCOMSDDL)    $DCOMconvertedPermissions = ,$DCOMbinarySD.BinarySD    $result = $security.PsBase.InvokeMethod("SetSD",$WMIconvertedPermissions)     $result = $Reg.SetBinaryValue(2147483650,"software\microsoft\ole","MachineLaunchRestriction", $DCOMbinarySD.binarySD)}***********************************************************STEP FOUR:Get the SID for our zenoss account.Powershell#Provide AD User get SID$objUser = New-Object System.Security.Principal.NTAccount("domain", "zenoss") $strSID = $objUser.Translate([System.Security.Principal.SecurityIdentifier]) $strSID.Value******************************************************************STEP FIVE:Modify the Service Control Manager to allow access to the zenoss AD account.This command can be run from an elevated command line, or through Powershellsc sdset scmanager "D:(A;;CC;;;AU)(A;;CCLCRPRC;;;IU)(A;;CCLCRPRC;;;SU)(A;;CCLCRPWPRC;;;SY)(A;;KA;;;BA)(A;;CCLCRPRC;;;PUT_YOUR_SID_HERE_FROM STEP_FOUR)S:(AU;FA;KA;;;WD)(AU;OIIOFA;GA;;;WD)"******************************************************************In step two the script plows through a txt file that processes each computer listed on each line.  For the other scripts I ran them on each machine using LANDesk.  You can probably edit those scripts to process a text file as well.That's what got me off the ground monitoring the machines using Zenoss.  Hopefully this is helpful for you.  Watch the line breaks when copy the scripts.

    Read the article

  • Which is a better practice - helper methods as instance or static?

    - by Ilian Pinzon
    This question is subjective but I was just curious how most programmers approach this. The sample below is in pseudo-C# but this should apply to Java, C++, and other OOP languages as well. Anyway, when writing helper methods in my classes, I tend to declare them as static and just pass the fields if the helper method needs them. For example, given the code below, I prefer to use Method Call #2. class Foo { Bar _bar; public void DoSomethingWithBar() { // Method Call #1. DoSomethingWithBarImpl(); // Method Call #2. DoSomethingWithBarImpl(_bar); } private void DoSomethingWithBarImpl() { _bar.DoSomething(); } private static void DoSomethingWithBarImpl(Bar bar) { bar.DoSomething(); } } My reason for doing this is that it makes it clear (to my eyes at least) that the helper method has a possible side-effect on other objects - even without reading its implementation. I find that I can quickly grok methods that use this practice and thus help me in debugging things. Which do you prefer to do in your own code and what are your reasons for doing so?

    Read the article

  • How i can sign and/or group a specific set of vertices in a 3D file container like OBJ ? - in Blender

    - by user827992
    I would like to export a 3D model with each part having a name or a label if you will. For example i would like to export a model of an human body and name each part in specifics vertex groups like: left hand, right hand, right foot, head, ears, ... and you got the idea; so i can have a single 3D model that i can explode in various parts if needed. If there is a better technique about how to mark vertex groups in a 3D file please share your solution. As 3D editor i use Blender.

    Read the article

  • SELECT TOP 1

    - by Derek Dieter
    There are many good uses of the SELECT TOP 1 method of querying. Essentially, the select top 1 method is used to find the min or max record for a particular value. There is some debate as to whether this is the ‘correct’ method of querying, however it should be known that this [...]

    Read the article

  • InvalidProgramException Running Unit Test

    - by Anthony Trudeau
    There is a bug in the unit testing framework in Visual Studio 2010 with unit testing.  The bug appears in a very special circumstance involving an internal generic type. The bug causes the following exception to be thrown: System.InvalidProgramException: JIT Compiler encountered an internal limitation. This occurs under the following circumstances: Type being tested is internal or private Method being tested is generic  Method being tested has an out parameter Type accessor functionality used to access the internal type The exception is not thrown if the InternalsVisibleToAttribute is assigned to the source assembly and the accessor type is not used; nor is it thrown if the method is not a generic method. Bug #635093 has been added through Microsoft Connect

    Read the article

  • Is code like this a "train wreck" (in violation of Law of Demeter)?

    - by Michael Kjörling
    Browsing through some code I've written, I came across the following construct which got me thinking. At a first glance, it seems clean enough. Yes, in the actual code the getLocation() method has a slightly more specific name which better describes exactly which location it gets. service.setLocation(this.configuration.getLocation().toString()); In this case, service is an instance variable of a known type, declared within the method. this.configuration comes from being passed in to the class constructor, and is an instance of a class implementing a specific interface (which mandates a public getLocation() method). Hence, the return type of the expression this.configuration.getLocation() is known; specifically in this case, it is a java.net.URL, whereas service.setLocation() wants a String. Since the two types String and URL are not directly compatible, some sort of conversion is required to fit the square peg in the round hole. However, according to the Law of Demeter as cited in Clean Code, a method f in class C should only call methods on C, objects created by or passed as arguments to f, and objects held in instance variables of C. Anything beyond that (the final toString() in my particular case above, unless you consider a temporary object created as a result of the method invocation itself, in which case the whole Law seems to be moot) is disallowed. Is there a valid reasoning why a call like the above, given the constraints listed, should be discouraged or even disallowed? Or am I just being overly nitpicky? If I were to implement a method URLToString() which simply calls toString() on a URL object (such as that returned by getLocation()) passed to it as a parameter, and returns the result, I could wrap the getLocation() call in it to achieve exactly the same result; effectively, I would just move the conversion one step outward. Would that somehow make it acceptable? (It seems to me, intuitively, that it should not make any difference either way, since all that does is move things around a little. However, going by the letter of the Law of Demeter as cited, it would be acceptable, since I would then be operating directly on a parameter to a function.) Would it make any difference if this was about something slightly more exotic than calling toString() on a standard type? When answering, do keep in mind that altering the behavior or API of the type that the service variable is of is not practical. Also, for the sake of argument, let's say that altering the return type of getLocation() is also impractical.

    Read the article

  • Interface extension

    - by user877329
    Suppose that I have an input stream interface, which defines a method for reading data. I also have a seekable interface which defines a method for seeking. A natural way of defining a input file is then to implement both input stream and seekable. I want to construct a data decoder from the input stream interface so I can read data from a file or from another stream. The problem is that I also want to implement seek functionality to the data decoder, since I want to be able to step individual records not raw bytes. This is not possible if I only provide an input stream, which does not have the bytewise seek method. Should I skip the seekable interface and add the seek method to input stream instead and force all streams to at least leave it as a nop.

    Read the article

  • Are long methods always bad?

    - by wobbily_col
    So looking around earlier I noticed some comments about long methods being bad practice. I am not sure I always agree that long methods are bad (and would like opinions from others). For example I have some Django views that do a bit of processing of the objects before sending them to the view, a long method being 350 lines of code. I have my code written so that it deals with the paramaters - sorting / filtering the queryset, then bit by bit does some processing on the objects my query has returned. So the processing is mainly conditional aggregation, that has complex enough rules it can't easily be done in the database, so I have some variables declared outside the main loop then get altered during the loop. varaible_1 = 0 variable_2 = 0 for object in queryset : if object.condition_condition_a and variable_2 > 0 : variable 1+= 1 ..... ... . more conditions to alter the variables return queryset, and context So according to the theory I should factor out all the code into smaller methods, so That I have the view method as being maximum one page long. However having worked on various code bases in the past, I sometimes find it makes the code less readable, when you need to constantly jump from one method to the next figuring out all the parts of it, while keeping the outermost method in your head. I find that having a long method that is well formatted, you can see the logic more easily, as it isn't getting hidden away in inner methods. I could factor out the code into smaller methods, but often there is is an inner loop being used for two or three things, so it would result in more complex code, or methods that don't do one thing but two or three (alternatively I could repeat inner loops for each task, but then there will be a performance hit). So is there a case that long methods are not always bad? Is there always a case for writing methods, when they will only be used in one place?

    Read the article

  • Configure Oracle Identity Manager AD/LDAP Authentication

    - by Arda Eralp
    Requirements (on AD side) LDAP connection user with the necessary rights in AD to do subtree searches on your users and groups container, respectively in the scope we configure below For LDAP in OIM to work, you need an AD Group called "oimusers", in which all users who shall be able to login to OIM need to be member. The group need to be named exactly "oimusers". Step 1: Login Weblogic Administration Console  Step 2: Create New Provider Authentication Provider Name: ADAuthenticationProvider Type: ActiveDirectoryAuthenticator Control Flag: SUFFICIENT   User scope configuration User Base DN: Container where your users are found Rest of the parameters stay default   Group scope configuration Group Base DN: Container where your groups are found Your "oimusers" group must be found in this container or in the subtree Rest of the parameters stay default  Step 3: Restart Admin Server Step 4: Check oimusers group Step 5: Re order providers Step 6: Restart Admin Server

    Read the article

  • design practice for business layer when supporting API versioning

    - by user1186065
    Is there any design pattern or practice recommended for business layer when dealing with multiple API version. For example, I have something like this. http://site.com/blogs/v1/?count=10 which calls business object method GetAllBlogs(int count) to get information http://site.com/blogs/v2/?blog_count=20 which calls business object method GetAllBlogs_v2(int blogCounts) Since parameter name is changed, I created another business method for version 2. This is just one example but it could have other breaking changes for which it requires me to create another method to support both version. Is there any design pattern or best practice for business/data access layer I should follow when supporting API Versioning?

    Read the article

  • Discovery methods

    - by Owen Allen
    In Ops Center, asset discovery is a process in which the software determines what assets exist in your environment. You can't monitor an asset, or do anything to it through Ops Center, until it's discovered. I've seen a couple of questions about how to discover various types of asset, so I thought I'd explain the discovery methods and what they each do. Find Assets - This discovery method searches for service tags on all known networks. Service tags are small files on some hardware and operating systems that provide basic identification info. Once a service tag has been found, you provide credentials to manage the asset. This method can discover assets quickly, but only if the target assets have service tags. Add Assets with discovery profile - This method lets you specify targets by providing IP addresses, IP ranges, or hostnames, as well as the credentials needed to connect to and manage these assets. You can create discovery profiles for any type of asset. Declare asset - This method lets you specify the details of a server, with or without a configured service processor. You can then use Ops Center to install a new operating system or configure the SP. This method works well for new hardware. These methods are all discussed in more detail in the Asset Management chapter of the Feature Reference guide.

    Read the article

  • Is this Hybrid of Interface / Composition kosher?

    - by paul
    I'm working on a project in which I'm considering using a hybrid of interfaces and composition as a single thing. What I mean by this is having a contain*ee* class be used as a front for functionality implemented in a contain*er* class, where the container exposes the containee as a public property. Example (pseudocode): class Visibility(lambda doShow, lambda doHide, lambda isVisible) public method Show() {...} public method Hide() {...} public property IsVisible public event Shown public event Hidden class SomeClassWithVisibility private member visibility = new Visibility(doShow, doHide, isVisible) public property Visibility with get() = visibility private method doShow() {...} private method doHide() {...} private method isVisible() {...} There are three reasons I'm considering this: The language in which I'm working (F#) has some annoyances w.r.t. implementing interfaces the way I need to (unless I'm missing something) and this will help avoid a lot of boilerplate code. The containee classes could really be considered properties of the container class(es); i.e. there seems to be a fairly strong has-a relationship. The containee classes will likely implement code which would have been pretty much the same when implemented in all the container classes, so why not do it once in one place? In the above example, this would include managing and emitting the Shown/Hidden events. Does anyone see any isseus with this Composiface/Intersition method, or know of a better way? EDIT 2012.07.26 - It seems a little background information is warranted: Where I work, we have a bunch of application front-ends that have limited access to system resources -- they need access to these resources to fully function. To remedy this we have a back-end application that can access the needed resources, with which the front-ends can communicate. (There is an API written for the front-ends for accessing back-end functionality as though it were part of the front-end.) The back-end program is out of date and its functionality is incomplete. It has made the transition from company to company a couple of times and we can't even compile it anymore. So I'm trying to rewrite it in my spare time. I'm trying to update things to make a nice(r) interface/API for the front-ends (while allowing for backwards compatibility with older front-ends), hopefully something full of OOPy goodness. The thing is, I don't want to write the front-end API after I've written pretty much the same code in F# for implementing the back-end; so, what I'm planning on doing is applying attributes to classes/methods/properties that I would like to have code for in the API then generate this code from the F# assembly using reflection. The method outlined in this question is a possible alternative I'm considering instead of implementing straight interfaces on the classes in F# because they're kind of a bear: In order to access something of an interface that has been implemented in a class, you have to explicitly cast an instance of that class to the interface type. This would make things painful when getting calls from the front-ends. If you don't want to have to do this, you have to call out all of the interface's methods/properties again in the class, outside of the interface implementation (which is separate from regular class members), and call the implementation's members. This is basically repeating the same code, which is what I'm trying to avoid!

    Read the article

  • When should one use "out" parameters?

    - by qegal
    In Objective-C, there are several methods like initWithContentsOfFile:encoding:error: where one passes in a reference to an NSError object for the error: parameter. In this example, the value of the NSError object passed in can change based on what goes on at runtime when the method is being called and whether the body of the method was executed in a certain way successfully. In a way I think of this NSError object as sort of like a second return value from the method, and only differs from an object anObject in the statement return anObject; in that when this statement is called, execution leaves the method. So my question is, not only in the context of error handling in Objective-C, but in general, when should one use an "out" parameter in place of returning said value in a return statement?

    Read the article

  • HTG Explains: How Hackers Take Over Web Sites with SQL Injection / DDoS

    - by Jason Faulkner
    Even if you’ve only loosely followed the events of the hacker groups Anonymous and LulzSec, you’ve probably heard about web sites and services being hacked, like the infamous Sony hacks. Have you ever wondered how they do it? There are a number of tools and techniques that these groups use, and while we’re not trying to give you a manual to do this yourself, it’s useful to understand what’s going on. Two of the attacks you consistently hear about them using are “(Distributed) Denial of Service” (DDoS) and “SQL Injections” (SQLI). Here’s how they work. Image by xkcd HTG Explains: How Hackers Take Over Web Sites with SQL Injection / DDoS Use Your Android Phone to Comparison Shop: 4 Scanner Apps Reviewed How to Run Android Apps on Your Desktop the Easy Way

    Read the article

  • Drawing Grid in 3D view - Mathematically calculate points and draw line between them (Not working)

    - by Deukalion
    I'm trying to draw a simple grid from a starting point and expand it to a size. Doing this mathematically and drawing the lines between each point, but since the "DrawPrimitives(LineList)" doesn't work the way it should work, And this method can't even draw lines between four points to create a simple Rectangle, so how does this method work exactly? Some sort of coordinate system: [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [ ][2.2][ ][0.2][ ][2.2][ ] [ ][2.1][1.1][ ][1.1][2.1][ ] [ ][2.0][ ][0.0][ ][2.0][ ] [ ][2.1][1.1][ ][1.1][2.1][ ] [ ][2.2][ ][0.2][ ][2.2][ ] [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] I've checked with my method and it's working as it should. It calculates all the points to form a grid. This way I should be able to create Points where to draw line right? This way, if I supply the method with Size = 2 it starts at 0,0 and works it through all the corners (2,2) on each side. So, I have the positions of each point. How do I draw lines between these? VerticeCount = must be number of Points in this case, right? So, tell me, if I can't supply this method with Point A, Point B, Point C, Point D to draw a four vertice rectangle (Point A - B - C - D) - how do I do it? How do I even begin to understand it? As far as I'm concered, that's a "Line list" or a list of points where to draw lines. Can anyone explain what I'm missing? I wish to do this mathematically so I can create a a custom grid that can be altered.

    Read the article

  • HowTo Enable jBullet DebugMode

    - by Kenneth Bray
    I would like to render the physics world of jBullet to debug some issues in my game, and I am not finding too much on enabling the debugDraw method of jBullet. Do I need to write my own debugDraw method, or is there an easier way to draw the physics models to the screen? If there is already a built in method I would prefer to use that, otherwise I guess I will start making my own functions to handle this.

    Read the article

  • Should I force users to update an application?

    - by Brian Green
    I'm writing an application for a medium sized company that will be used by about 90% of our employees and our clients. In planning for the future we decided to add functionality that will verify that the version of the program that is running is a version that we still support. Currently the application will forcequit if the version is not among our supported versions. Here is my concern. Hypothetically, in version 2.0.0.1 method "A" crashes and burns in glorious fashion and method "B" works just fine. We release 2.0.0.2 to fix method A and deprecate version 0.1. Now if someone is running 0.1 to use method B they will be forced to update to fix something that isn't an issue for them right now. My question is, will the time saved not troubleshooting old, unsupported versions outweigh the cost in usability?

    Read the article

  • Useful WatiN Extension Methods

    - by Steve Wilkes
    I've been doing a fair amount of UI testing using WatiN recently – here’s some extension methods I've found useful. This checks if a WatiN TextField is actually a hidden field. WatiN makes no distinction between text and hidden inputs, so this can come in handy if you render an input sometimes as hidden and sometimes as a visible text field. Note that this doesn't check if an input is visible (I've got another extension method for that in a moment), it checks if it’s hidden. public static bool IsHiddenField(this TextField textField) { if (textField == null || !textField.Exists) { return false; } var textFieldType = textField.GetAttributeValue("type"); return (textFieldType != null) && textFieldType.ToLowerInvariant() == "hidden"; } The next method quickly sets the value of a text field to a given string. By default WatiN types the text you give it into a text field one character at a time which can be necessary if you have behaviour you want to test which is triggered by individual key presses, but which most of time is just painfully slow; this method dumps the text in in one go. Note that if it's not a hidden field then it gives it focus first; this helps trigger validation once the value has been set and focus moves elsewhere. public static void SetText(this TextField textField, string value) { if ((textField == null) || !textField.Exists) { return; } if (!textField.IsHiddenField()) { textField.Focus(); } textField.Value = value; } Finally, here's a method which checks if an Element is currently visible. It does so by walking up the DOM and checking for a Style.Display of 'none' on any element between the one on which the method is invoked, and any of its ancestors. public static bool IsElementVisible(this Element element) { if ((element == null) || !element.Exists) { return false; } while ((element != null) && element.Exists) { if (element.Style.Display.ToLowerInvariant().Contains("none")) { return false; } element = element.Parent; } return true; } Hope they come in handy

    Read the article

  • Security for LDAP authentication for Collabnet

    - by Robert May
    In a previous post, I wrote about how to get LDAP authentication working in Collabnet. By default, all LDAP users are put into the Users role on the server.  For most purposes, this is just fine, and I don’t have a way to change this.  The documentation gives hints that you can add them to other roles, but for now, I don’t have the need. However, adding permissions to different repositories is a different question. To add them, go to the repositories list, select Access Rules and then you can enter in their username, as it sits in Active Directory to the lists for the repositories or for the predefined groups that you have created.  To my knowledge, you cannot use the Active Directory groups in collabnet, which is a big problem.  Needing to micromanage users really limits the usefulness of the LDAP integration. Technorati Tags: subversion,collabnet

    Read the article

  • A correct way for JAVA age calculation? [closed]

    - by Jhonnytunes
    I have already a Java calculation of age method. I have a Person Class where I have the method and I need to ask the current time each time the method is called. All I could do is make age a static field of person class, so all person classes use the same time now. Im worring about the Calendar.get() creating Calendar objects every time method is called. Am I doing it wrong? Can I make it better? public short getAge(){ now = Calendar.getInstance(); return (short) ( (now.getTimeInMillis() - birthDate.getTimeInMillis())/ 31536000000L); }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202  | Next Page >