I currently have a script in /etc/init.d which calls autossh with port forward to set up reverse ssh on the server.  The command is preceded by 'sleep 20' to try to ensure the command is called after networking is active.  The questions is, what is a better way to run this script later in the boot cycle (after networking is set up)?  Could/should this be moved to /etc/rc.local or is there a better solution?
I'm working on moving my current server setup to newer hardware, and migrating from ubuntu karmic koala to lucid lynx. Currently i'm using gw6c (compiled from the gogo6 website, as opposed to the version from the repositories) to get ipv6 access for my systems. On the karmic koala system, i used simple init.d script to get the ipv6 client started   #! /bin/sh /usr/local/gw6c/bin/gw6c -f /usr/local/gw6c/bin/gw6c.conf   I figured since this runs at any runlevel, it should translate to  respawn console none  start on startup  stop on shutdown  script exec /usr/local/gw6c/bin/gw6c -f /usr/local/gw6c/bin/gw6c.conf emit free6_ipv6_started end script   this works fine started from initctrl, but it apparently fails to start when it boots. - its status being stop/waiting. It works fine (and respawns) when started otherwise.Any ideas on where i'm going wrong, and what would be the appropriate 'start on' arguement?  EDIT: the exact error is 'init: gw6c main process (xxx) ended with status 8' followed by the process respawning , with xxx being a PID i suspect. I'm also half suspecting this is cause gw6c starts before networking does, and i need my eth0 up before gw6c is
Pass C# ASP.NET array to Javascript array Product of elements of a finite abelian group Suppose $G=\{a_1,...,a_n\}$ is a finite abelian group, and let $x=a_1a_2\dotsm a_n$.   Prove that if there is more than one element of order $2$ then $x=e$.   What I've done so far: (#1 is just for illustration, There should be at least $3$ such elements)   $G$ has an even number of elements with order $&gt;2$ (They are paired so: $(a,a^{-1})$ ). And then there are $e$ and $\{b|o(b)=2\}$. Also, if $G$ has at least one element of order 2 then $|G|$ is even (Lagrange). Thus $|\{b|o(b)=2\}|$ must be odd. If there is exactly one element $b$ of order $2$ then $x=b$. That's because $G$ is abelian, and we can write: $x=e\cdot b\cdot(a_1 a_{1}^{-1}\dotsm a_n a_{n}^{-1})=b\cdot(e\dotsm e)=b$. If there are exactly $3$ such elements $a,b,c\in G$, then, as shown above, $x=abc$ and thus $x=e$ (That's because $(abc)^2=a^2b^2c^2=e$ which means $abc\in \{a,b,c,e\}$. If $abc=a$ then $b=c^{-1}=c$ which is false, same goes for $abc=b,abc=c$.)   I haven't managed to find a reason why the claim must hold for $5, 7, ...$ (i.e. All other odd integers). Does anyone have an idea?  Thanks in advance. Please excuse my English.  edit: Not a canonical answer but a simple one (if such even exists). What is the exact reason that normal matter can not exist within an event horizon?  I can understand how a super-dense object like a neutron star could accrete mass until its physical radius is less than its Schwarzschild radius and an event horizon forms around it.   But why can't the neutron star remain inside the event horizon as it was before the event horizon formed? Aside from the escape velocity at the surface reaching $c$, what actually changed?  Why must all matter within an event horizon undergo complete physical collapse to a point? Consider the following:   $1 = 1^2$ $2 + 2 = 2^2$ $3 + 3 + 3 = 3^2$   Therefore,   $\underbrace{x + x + x + \ldots + x}_{x \textrm{ times}}= x^2$   Take the derivative of lhs and rhs and we get:   $\underbrace{1 + 1 + 1 + \ldots + 1}_{x \textrm{ times}} = 2x$   Which simplifies to:   $x = 2x$   and hence    $1 = 2$.     Clearly something is wrong but I am unable pinpoint my mistake. Change HTML Produced by wp_list_comments() I am developing a WordPress theme for which I would like each comment's timestamp wrapped in in a &lt;span&gt; element for the sake of styling it with CSS rules. However,  as I use it in my theme's comments.php template does not seem to provide options to alter the HTML produced:  &lt;ol class="comment-list"&gt;     &lt;?php         wp_list_comments( array(             'style'       =&gt; 'ol',             'format'      =&gt; 'html5',             'short_ping'  =&gt; true,         ) );     ?&gt; &lt;/ol&gt;   which produces timestamps as such:  &lt;time datetime="2015-12-21T19:09:49+00:00"&gt; december 21st,  2015 on 19:09 &lt;/time&gt;   How can I alter the function's output to include a &lt;span&gt;element around each &lt;time&gt; element without altering core files?  I've tried looking at my theme's functions.php, as well as WordPress wp-includes/comment.php and wp-includes/comment-template.php. None of them deal with the actual tag structure of the comment timestamps generated by wp_list_comments(), so there was nothing there for me to play with. Question on determinants of matrices changing between integer matrices The following problem came up from a though I had while reading:  Let's say we have $M=\mathbb{Z}^n$ and we have another free $\mathbb{Z}$-module, $N$, inside of $M$ also with rank $n$.  We know we can make a matrix $A$ that changes $N$ to its representation in $M$ (ie has as columns the basis $N$ expressed in coordinates coming from the basis of $M$). If the index of $N$ in $M$ is $m$, I am pretty sure just from tinkering that the determinant of $A$ should also be $m$, however, I have not been able to show this.  It is unclear to me how to proceed. I though maybe I could do something related to the points in $\mathbb{Z}^n$ that are within the unit box of $N$, but I cannot really make sense of this.  Thank you for any help or direction. Proof of the equality $\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty} \frac{k^2}{2^k} = 6$ Show that for $k$ running over positive integers  $$ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{k^2}{2^k}=6 .$$ We can use finite calculus. Help removing subsection and subsubsection numbers from Table of Contents TOC Hello I am trying to further modify my TOC.  I got an answer  as to how I could remove the \section numbers on the left side of the TOC and now I would like to expand that.  I would like to remove the left-hand numbering for \subsection and \subsubsection as well but I do not know how.  (I also want to keep these numbers out of the document and I am using \def\sectionformat{} to do that)  Also, my TOC is slightly over one page and so I would like to adjust the spacing from 2 to 1.5,  is there any way to do this?    \documentclass[12pt, a4paper, twoside]{article}     \usepackage{baskervald}     \usepackage[margin=1in,bindingoffset=15.5mm,heightrounded]{geometry}     \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}     \usepackage[notes]{biblatex-chicago}     \usepackage{filecontents}     \usepackage{microtype}     \usepackage{url}     \usepackage{makeidx}     \usepackage{indentfirst}     \usepackage{setspace}     \usepackage{chngcntr}\counterwithin*{footnote}{section}     \newcommand*{\textsubscript}[1]{$#1{}$}     \DefineBibliographyStrings{english}{references = {Works Cited}}     \DeclareBibliographyCategory{primary}     \makeindex     \addbibresource{bibliography.bib}     \makeatletter     \let\latexl@section\l@section     \def\l@section#1#2{\begingroup\let\numberline\@gobble\latexl@section{#1}{#2}\endgroup}     \def\@seccntformat#1{\ifcsname #1format\endcsname\else\csname the#1\endcsname\quad\fi}     \def\sectionformat{}     \def\subsectionformat{}     \def\subsubsectionformat{}     \makeatother     \author{}     \title{\vspace*{36 pt}\textbf{\emph{\Huge{Big Important Title}}}\vfill}     \date{}     \begin{document}     \tableofcontents     \section{Part I}     Hello World     \end{document} How to find the determinant of this $3 \times 3$ Hankel matrix? Today, at my linear algebra exam, there was this question that I couldn't solve.   Prove that $$\det \begin{bmatrix}  n^{2} &amp; (n+1)^{2} &amp;(n+2)^{2} \\  (n+1)^{2} &amp;(n+2)^{2}  &amp; (n+3)^{2}\\  (n+2)^{2} &amp; (n+3)^{2} &amp; (n+4)^{2} \end{bmatrix} = -8$$   Clearly, calculating the determinant, with the matrix as it is, wasn't the right way. The calculations went on and on. But I couldn't think of any other way to solve it. Is there any way to simplify $A$, so as to calculate the determinant? Why is setting a variable before a command legal in bash? I've just encountered several answers such as to  that use the construct:  while IFS=, read xx yy zz;do     echo $xx $yy $zz done &lt; input_file   where the IFS variable is set before the read command.  I've been reading through the  but can't figure out why this is legal.  I tried  $ x="once upon" y="a time" echo $x $y   from the bash command prompt but got nothing echoed. Can someone point me to where that syntax is defined in the reference that allows the IFS variable to be set in that way? Is it a special case or can I do something similar w/ other variables? Implications and Ordinary language Countable sets have the same cardinality as the natural numbers (or a subset of the natural numbers, depending on who you ask).  Can one make the same claim about uncountable sets and real numbers?  In other words, do all uncountable sets have same cardinality as real numbers? How to compile self-referencing functions (to perform recursive a task) "going to" vs "will" I know several questions were asked about the difference between "going to" and "will". Based on several answers (see, for instance, ,  and ), I understood that "will" is more spontaneous and "going to" is used with more planned actions.  So, it seems that everything is pretty fine. However, in , Kosmonaut has an answer in which he states: "Let's say that tomorrow you will walk your dog from 7 - 8 AM".  On the one hand, you probably planned to walk your dog long before and thus I should use "Let's say that tomorrow you're going to walk your dog from 7 - 8 am".   On the other hand, since I'm saying "let's say...", I'm deciding right now (thus, unplanned) that you will walk your dog. So, even though in this hypothetical situation you made a plan, I'm in a more spontaneous mood deciding right now that that's what you will do tomorrow, and, thus, I should use "will".  Which one (if any) of the above explanations is right? How do I use Conditional Formatting based on due dates in Excel 2013? I am trying to format cells in Excel 2013. I want the cells to get colored as green, yellow, and red based on how close they are with the target date (January 13, 2015 in this case).  I am unable to use conditional formatting as Excel says that relative formatting is not permitted within conditional formatting.   Target:   06-01-2015  01-01-2015 02-01-2015 03-01-2015 04-01-2015 05-01-2015 06-01-2015 07-01-2015 08-01-2015 09-01-2015 10-01-2015   If the date in the cell is more than 2 days of the target date, I want the cell to change color to Green. I used =DATEDIF($N12,$N$9,"d")&gt;=3 and the format changed to green.  If the date in the cell is exactly 2 days near the target date, I want the cell to change color to yellow. I used =DATEDIF($N12,$N$9,"d")=2 and the format changed to yellow.  If the date in the cell is within 2 days of the target date, I want the cell to change color to red. I used =DATEDIF($N12,$N$9,"d")&lt;2 and the format changed to red only for 5th and 6th January. Apparently, it does not recognize negative values.  How can I get this to match the required colors? Logical Volume, Physical Volume and Volume Groups Why won't my villagers breed Why aren't these loops homotopic? Let $S^1 = \{z \in \mathbb{C} : |z| = 1\}$.  Take the loops $f,g : [0,1] \rightarrow S^1$, $f(t) = 1$, $g(t) = e^{2\pi it}$.  I know these represent different elements in $\pi_1(S^1, 1)$, but I don't see why $F(t,s) = e^{2\pi its}$ isn't a homotopy between $f$ and $g$. Assume $x \in \mathbb{R}$ and $(x + \frac{1}{x}) \in \mathbb{Z}$.   Use Induction to prove that for all $n \in \mathbb{N},~ (x^n + \frac{1}{x^n}) \in \mathbb{Z}$.  I'm not sure how to use the information given to prove the induction step. What I have so far is.  $P(n) : (x^n + \frac{1}{x^n}) \in \mathbb{Z}$  Base Case Then $(x^0 + \frac{1}{x^0}) = 2 \in \mathbb{Z}$  Induction Hypothesis: $x^k + \frac{1}{x^k}\in \mathbb{Z}$  Want to prove: $x^{k+1} + \frac{1}{x^{k+1}} \in \mathbb{Z}$  My first step was  $x^{k+1} + \frac{1}{x^{k+1}} = x \cdot x^k + \frac{1}{x} \cdot \frac{1}{x^k}$ Solution of limit $\lim\limits_{x\to 0} \frac {e^{-1/x^2}}{x} $ Small question, I'm trying to solve this limit but I just can't wrap my head around this problem.  $$\lim_{x\to 0} \frac {e^{-1/x^2}}{x} $$  L'Hopital just seems to make it messier.   It's probably pretty simple - I'd like to hear what I'm missing.