smb big sur

Within Network framework, every connection has a send buffer [1]. That buffer has a high-water mark, that is, its expected maximum size. When you send data on the connection, the system always adds the data to the buffer. After that, one of two things happens: If the amount of buffered data is below the high-water mark, the system immediately calls the completion handler associated with the send. If not, it defers calling your completion handler. That is, it holds to on the completion handler and only calls it once the amount of buffered data has dropped to a reasonable level. If you have a lot of data to send, the easiest approach is to send a chunk of data and, in the completion handler, send the next chunk. Assuming the network is consuming data slower than you’re producing it, the amount of buffered data will rapidly increase until it exceeds the high-water mark. At that point the system will stop calling your completion handler, which means you’ll stop sending new data. This gives the network tranport a

my server(PBX) requests a VoIP(APNs) PUSH notification to the APNs. But my app does not receive the VoIP(APNs) PUSH. At this time, my app is running on LAN (Wi-Fi without internet connection), as a result, NetworkExtension was running. so I think this is normal behaviour. Just to clarify here, the system doesn't differentiate or attempt any kind of de-duplication or arbitration between VOIP pushes and the network extension. The voip push can fail to reach your device because the device is on an isolated network, but that's no different than any other failed voip push. 14:55:11 PM: There is an incoming call from the my server(PBX) via local net, and NetworkExtension calls iOS API(API name is reportIncomingCall). However, iOS does not call the delegate didReceiveIncomingCallWithUserInfo for the reportIncomingCall. 14:55:11 PM: At almost the same time, iOS calls the delegate cdidReceiveIncomingPushWithPayload of VoIP PUSH. (instead of call the delegate didReceiveIncomingCallWithUserInfo for the reportIncomingCal

Description: The issue with USB FAT32 is seen in Sequoia OS. Most of the times issue is seen when FAT32 USB is mounted along with other USBs like XFAT. The scenario is where USB mounting is monitored using Endpoint Security framework event ES_EVENT_TYPE_AUTH_MOUNT and when event is received, it will be denied for mounting is it is in read-write mode. And, program tries to mount the USB in read-only mode. I'm not sure of exactly what's going on in your code, but I have a number of issues and concerns: If you're going to be blocking/altering mounts, then I strongly recommend that you use DiskArbitration as your primary blocking system, with ES acting as your security backstop. The issue here is that DiskArbitration is a higher level API that's better integrated into the system, which should make the entire user experience smoother. Related to that point, I haven't tested this but I believe you could initiate your read-only mount in (or shortly after) the disk appearance. For the standard automount path (basical

The Inside Code Signing technotes have to strike a delicate balance between: Helping developers understand how this stuff works, and Discussing too many implementation details The end result was that they don’t go into minute detail — they’re not a specification of the code signature format! — and I put a big disclaimer at the top of each technote (-: And with that in mind, let’s look at your specific question: [quote='772761021, SteveM-JC, /thread/772761, /profile/SteveM-JC'] is there a way to recreate that blob given a signed artifact? [/quote] Not in a way that DTS is prepared to support. The signing code is in Darwin so you could rummage around there to see what’s what. However, this isn’t something we support because these low-level details of code signing have changed in the past and could well change again in the future. Having said that, I understand your desire to track the origin of signed artefacts, and it’d be nice if we could create a supported path forward. I encourage you to file an en

My content does fill the entire screen. I am also using SKShapeNode for the game's area and my level background that I need collision on. When using alphaThreshold: 1.0, no collision happen. When removing the alphaThreshold, collision happen instantly, even in the hollowed/transparent area of my level background asset. Some context: A rocket spawns on a base. The rocket moves within the transparent area of the background, and collides with its when hitting the opaque area of the background (walls) GameScene.swift Level1View.swift Here is the test level background image I am using, a big white square, with a smaller hollow square in the middle of it:

[quote='821608022, tpitman, /thread/771139?answerId=821608022#821608022, /profile/tpitman'] Why did this work last summer? [/quote] I’m not sure. The issue here is that, when you do this wrongly, your code ends up relying on undefined behaviour. That behaviour can change for all sorts of reasons, so it’s hard to say exactly why something failed or worked. So, rather than focus on why it stopped working, my general advice is that you focus on getting it working, and getting it working in a way that won’t break in the future. Which brings me back to the big picture. What are these broadcasts meant to do? That’ll inform how you decide which set of interfaces to broadcast on. For example, if the user connects an Ethernet interface to their iOS device, do you want the broadcasts to be sent over Ethernet, over Wi-Fi, or both? Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = eskimo + 1 + @ + apple.com

Hello, I think that all the EFB Admins dealing with iPad devices are struggling with the same issue. Apple will never tell you this information. I've tried to request it several times since 2015. Some years ago, Jeppesen said that as far as you have an accurate gps signal, you will have the location on FDProX. If the signal strength is not enough, then it will dissappear and will not be displayed. At the end, we have the AMM and we cannot use it because we cannot prove that the iPad's built-in GPS receiver has 12 channels. Apple should provide this information. They are fully aware that airlines are big users of this product. C'mon guys, the only thing you have to do is to write a statement in the specifications saying that! We don't want to know the manufacturer name of that antenna! Only how many channels there are!