Lets face it, sysV init is complicated. Well, the theory behind the old linear start from init script 00 and move to init script 99 isn't, but the modern implementations and the scripts themselves are complicated. I mean you're doing dependency checking and a whole bunch of other things in bash scripts. Compare that to a systemd service file, which is overall nice and readable. So, part of it is factoring out the logic from the variables. The other big thing is bash and the tools used by init scripts are like using a sledgehammer to tap in a finishing nail.
I'm not going to say that systemd is perfect. I like the "unix" way which is to use small units that do one thing well instead of anything. That's part of the reason I see bash init scripts as too much for the job. Unfortunately, the systemd authors look like they want to throw in everything but the kitchen sink. Well, everything that they can't just port to kernel space that is. But that's the thing, Linux is a Monolithic kernel. Like it or not, the "Linux" way is to have one uber optimized thing with modules to handle everything.
In the end, I just really like the ease of use of service files. Oh, and the stupidly fast boot time on my laptop is really nice. People who say boot times don't matter aren't living in the real world.
Nope, nothing new to the Telcos or pretty much anyone who had to take a Signals course. The Nyquist rate has been known singe Harry Nyquist published it in 1928. The trick is that it sets a maximum number of symbols as twice the bandwidth. If you're only using one symbol (a '1' or '0') then the baud (symbol) rate is equal to the bit rate. If you're using more symbols like in modern systems (eg. 64QAM) then the baud rate doesn't change, but the bit rate (in Mbps) goes up exponentially.
Combining multiple transceivers which each use the same bandwidth but with different frequencies is also very common. It's a form of multiplexing, and is how many cell phones and cable modems can share the same wire without reducing throughput.
I'm only familiar with nyquist when it comes to audio phenomina... but if you're using more than half the bandwidth won't you have to deal with artifacting (aliasing in the audio world)?
Nope. The Nyquist-Shannon theorem deals with sampling rate. It says you have to be sampling at least twice as fast as the highest frequency if you want to perfectly decode the signal. The Nyquist rate deals with the maximum amount of data that can be transmitted. It says the absolute maximum symbol rate is equal to twice the bandwidth.
It's an easy mistake to make because the first is often called the "Nyquist sampling theorem," and they both deal closely with the same concepts. The wiki page I originally linked to was the Shannon–Hartley theorem, which is an adaptation to the Nyquist rate to account for noise reducing the theoretical maximum. It also explains Nyquist rate better than the actual Nyquist Rate wiki page.:/
Yes. The energy that gets you one single green photon gets you 75000 radio photons at the Cassini probe's X-band comm frequencies, for example. Having 75000 times more quanta means your system can be built on well-known classical principles (i.e. standard microwave radios) and work as expected.
But can one green photon hold more information than an RF photon?
The trick is when you're talking about bandwidth. "A key characteristic of bandwidth is that any band of a given width can carry the same amount of information, regardless of where that band is located in the frequency spectrum." Visible light is approximately "430–790 THz." While X-Band is "8.0 to 12.0 GHz" So you're talking about hundreds of THz vs 4 GHz.
Nyquist says the absolute maximum symbol rate is equal to twice the bandwidth. This means that once you've hit that cap, the only way to send more data is to either increase the number of bits per symbol or increase the frequency. Increasing the symbol rate can end up taking expensive delicate equipment, so it's easier to just throw a second transceiver at the problem. The second one would be exactly like the first, but would be operating at a slightly different frequency. The spectrum for light is a much larger playground for this than X-Band is.
Am I the only person who considers it interesting that DigitalGlobe is prevented from selling high resolution images by the US while state governments are practically giving away even higher resolution images. This kind of crap is why conspiracy theories are so common. Though, my bets on good old government incompetence.
Umm, what's the point of any of that? That's like saying banks are a ponzi scheme because they constantly screw up paperwork, and don't like to let people withdraw large amounts of money.
Bitcoins are assets. This (DDOS) situation is somewhat like if the bridges to a warehouse/shopping center were deliberately destroyed. The assets are still there, you just can't get to them. Hell, they even have futures markets for the things. The problem is that it's very easy to create you're own exchange, but hard to follow the (deliberately complex) regulations that govern such an exchange.
The problem is that the legal limit is (in the UK at least) 60 watts. As there lasers will emit many more lumens per watt than the incandescent bulbs in use when the law was written, this doesn't stop them being much too bright.
So what you're saying is lawmakers didn't understand the technology they attempted to regulate, and ended up passing regulations that affect the wrong thing. (lumens vs watts) What a shock. Say it isn't so.
The problem is that overseas aircraft are treated the same as kit built ones by the FAA. They're "experimental" so you don't have to get FAA certified everything, but that's because non US parts normally aren't normally FAA certified, even if they're from the manufacturer. This sounds neat until you realize that these "experimental" aircraft are restricted by the FAA, and you'll be paying an insurance premium. Plus, you now have to worry about finding a mechanic that will work on your plane.
Fortunately, my university's grading policies were well known enough by employers in my field, so that the relatively lower GPA were taken into account when recruiting.
And we have the problem right there. I graduated from a uni like yours*, and like your example the businesses in the area take that kind of thing in question. The problem is for anyone who doesn't want to work in the same area. Unless the school is well known, the recruiter will take one look at your GPA and your application goes in the trash. Hell, some companies require you to apply online. I doubt the system ever even lets a human see the application if your GPA is below a certain number.
*Well, at least one that didn't pull punches when it comes to grading anyways.
It's relatively easy to get those features if you don't mind breaking all backwards compatibility. Which is what Android did.
It gives each separate process it's own UID, but has them all using a common display server. Then you combine the way that almost everything has to be done through the android framework with some special kernel patches. For instance,/etc is normally used for settings files, but that means special things have to be done if you want to mount root as read only. Especially since some of those files, like resolv.conf, must be updated while running.
Most good daemons already run as their own user/group. Android has just moved that from the application to the framework/installer.
On another note, I don't want things to be complicated to the end user. I just want to be able to easily have a read only root partition, and know that it and my kernel hasn't been tampered with evil maid style. I could go with encryption, but that no only eats some CPU, but it destroys DMA. Secure boot makes sure the kernel's ok, and simple file hashing makes sure they haven't been tampered with.
Newer versions of Linux can already do this. Using the integrity measurement architecture, module signing, and Secure Boot it's possible to have a system where almost any change is detected. I'm currently trying to get it all working on my machine right now, but it's slow going. Here's hoping that distros start shipping with this set up by default. http://lwn.net/Articles/488906...
A shorter term security measure that more users/Distributions should take is making the root partition read only. I know Android already does this, but it really does help. Something that I would really like to see is an easy to use per application firewall. Cgroups mean that I don't even have to worry about it just spawning a child process. Yes, I want to play this game in wine. No, I don't want it to access the internet. No, wine refuses to run it as a different user, much less one with lower privileges.
Judges don't take kindly to things like this, plus Evidence Tampering is a separate crime.
Then there's the fruit of the poison tree argument. I don't know about NZ, but here in the US all evidence that comes from illegal evidence is considered illegal. So if the original evidence against Dot Com was illegally obtained by the GCSB, then everything, including all the search warants, is inadmissible. That's probably why it was deleted. When Dot Com's lawyers go to make that argument expect the government to say something like "you have no proof."
That's the danger of not RTFMing. Or in this case watching the video posted in the comments.
The short answer is "X11 IS NOT NETWORK TRANSPARENT. It's network capable, there's a difference."
X11's "network capability" is something like a per window VNC connection. The typical answer from Wayland devs, who used to be X11 devs, is to just use VNC.
This story reminds me why I don't use GoDaddy and, if you haven't already done so, activate two-factor authentication on your Gmail account.
It's not bulletproof (what is?) but it's an extra layer of security that keeps a hacker from getting control of your email account.
The problem is quite a few of us with our own domains use a per site E-Mail address. It's useful to know that half my spam comes from equifax. Plus some people decide to forgo Gmail Labels and run their own mail server. In either case, when you have control of the domain you have control of all the E-Mails going to that domain. Many websites either don't have a password reset question, or the answer is easy to guess/brute force.
Put another way: Domain control = E-Mail control = Control of almost all your accounts.
Yes, it's related to the cold, but it also appears to be related to the specific issues of Norway's grid.
Some speculation is that the problem involves too-extreme fluctuations in the electricity provided by that grid and a charger-side software-mediated shutoff of charging. If that's the case, then this might be another charger issue that can be solved with an over-the-air "patch" like some of the previous problems.
While this is definitely a concern for Tesla and their Norwegian customers, it doesn't seem to be relevant to cars in North America.
Well the last patch tried to prevent fires by assuming that if there was too much fluctuation then the contacts were bad. My predication is the next anti Tesla story reads "Norway Tesla's more likely to catch fire" or something equally stupid.
So naturally all the places that would rather the government pay for healthcare cut their employees hours down to 29/week. Now they're complaining about not having enough qualified employees.....
When was the last time you saw a Walmart with most of the shelves stocked and the registers open?
Lack of explicit regulation/laws on free speech and lack of free speech are two different things.
In theory that's true, but many parts of the EU outright ban certain speech. For example, I don't like the Nazis and consider them to be horrible; However, when people are prevented from showing their colors to the world they, rightly, think that people are out to get them. So instead of some crazies yelling whatever they want you have people who can only get attention through things like violence.
The EU is also responsible for the Data Retention Directive. Worse, most of their spy agencies are just as bad as the NSA. When you combine that with the lack of free speech in many EU countries it doesn't paint a pretty picture.
They're going to force companies to keep user data on EU soil. Which sounds nice, but that means they can force companies to keep your data for as long as they want and hand it all over to "law enforcement" when you've done something inconvenient. They will then have things like search results censored. (See Google France) I hate to say it, but people in the EU have even less privacy than those of us in the US. Even with/especially because of these privacy directives.
They've effectively bribed the states into giving them a monopoly position. Which then allows them to squeeze their customers dry and use a portion of that money to pay more bribes. Since the US uses a winner takes all election system, and it's nearly impossible to properly research local/state representative candidates they can get away with things like this pretty easily. For clarity, I consider lobbying to be a form of legalized bribery.
Unless you're sitting still it often lags behind and any realistic movement would guarantee you face would not be hidden. Javascript developers have an odd sense of what real time is.
Javascript and real time should never be used together. For all the improvements by browser vendors javascript is still almost as slow as the US congress.
Being a major industrialised nation with a nuclear power program, Japan has no nuclear research facilities so they're going to do it in downtown Tokyo.
Wait, there's more to Japan than Tokyo?
You'd never guess it by watching half of their movies and TV shows.
Quick guide to binary files. Mostly from my and others work on game saves. Almost all of them store the size of an array right before the data. This is even true for things like null terminated strings. What gets fun is when you have an array of structs, which then holds an array. Most of those are read in using standard for loops, but an off by one error is still possible. Another (admittedly stupid) possibility is using a string read function that looks for the '\0' character while working with a fixed sized array instead of a true string object. Actually it's really easy for a malformed binary file to have a program attempting to read in gigabytes of data, or for a program that's not perfect to interpret some random number as an array size.
About font files: Remember that font files tend to be ridiculously complicated. The new ones at least actually run code in a special virtual machine. Given everything that I've said about binary files an just how many Java/Flash/Javascript VM flaws we've seen it's not really surprising.
About X: Hell, X11 is so complicated I wouldn't be surprised if an arbitrary function could load random fonts via a function call that no toolkit ever uses. At that point you're talking about a normal function with any of the normal error cases.
Pick your poison. There are many possibilities for errors.
The amazing thing is that cppcheck caught it. That means it had to be some static problem with the code.
cppcheck says this code is fine. Try to see why I disagree:
Slashdot Mirror
Lets face it, sysV init is complicated. Well, the theory behind the old linear start from init script 00 and move to init script 99 isn't, but the modern implementations and the scripts themselves are complicated. I mean you're doing dependency checking and a whole bunch of other things in bash scripts. Compare that to a systemd service file, which is overall nice and readable. So, part of it is factoring out the logic from the variables. The other big thing is bash and the tools used by init scripts are like using a sledgehammer to tap in a finishing nail.
I'm not going to say that systemd is perfect. I like the "unix" way which is to use small units that do one thing well instead of anything. That's part of the reason I see bash init scripts as too much for the job. Unfortunately, the systemd authors look like they want to throw in everything but the kitchen sink. Well, everything that they can't just port to kernel space that is. But that's the thing, Linux is a Monolithic kernel. Like it or not, the "Linux" way is to have one uber optimized thing with modules to handle everything.
In the end, I just really like the ease of use of service files. Oh, and the stupidly fast boot time on my laptop is really nice. People who say boot times don't matter aren't living in the real world.
Nope, nothing new to the Telcos or pretty much anyone who had to take a Signals course. The Nyquist rate has been known singe Harry Nyquist published it in 1928. The trick is that it sets a maximum number of symbols as twice the bandwidth. If you're only using one symbol (a '1' or '0') then the baud (symbol) rate is equal to the bit rate. If you're using more symbols like in modern systems (eg. 64QAM) then the baud rate doesn't change, but the bit rate (in Mbps) goes up exponentially.
Combining multiple transceivers which each use the same bandwidth but with different frequencies is also very common. It's a form of multiplexing, and is how many cell phones and cable modems can share the same wire without reducing throughput.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I'm only familiar with nyquist when it comes to audio phenomina... but if you're using more than half the bandwidth won't you have to deal with artifacting (aliasing in the audio world)?
Nope. The Nyquist-Shannon theorem deals with sampling rate. It says you have to be sampling at least twice as fast as the highest frequency if you want to perfectly decode the signal. The Nyquist rate deals with the maximum amount of data that can be transmitted. It says the absolute maximum symbol rate is equal to twice the bandwidth.
It's an easy mistake to make because the first is often called the "Nyquist sampling theorem," and they both deal closely with the same concepts. The wiki page I originally linked to was the Shannon–Hartley theorem, which is an adaptation to the Nyquist rate to account for noise reducing the theoretical maximum. It also explains Nyquist rate better than the actual Nyquist Rate wiki page. :/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Yes. The energy that gets you one single green photon gets you 75000 radio photons at the Cassini probe's X-band comm frequencies, for example. Having 75000 times more quanta means your system can be built on well-known classical principles (i.e. standard microwave radios) and work as expected.
But can one green photon hold more information than an RF photon?
The trick is when you're talking about bandwidth. "A key characteristic of bandwidth is that any band of a given width can carry the same amount of information, regardless of where that band is located in the frequency spectrum." Visible light is approximately "430–790 THz." While X-Band is "8.0 to 12.0 GHz" So you're talking about hundreds of THz vs 4 GHz.
Nyquist says the absolute maximum symbol rate is equal to twice the bandwidth. This means that once you've hit that cap, the only way to send more data is to either increase the number of bits per symbol or increase the frequency. Increasing the symbol rate can end up taking expensive delicate equipment, so it's easier to just throw a second transceiver at the problem. The second one would be exactly like the first, but would be operating at a slightly different frequency. The spectrum for light is a much larger playground for this than X-Band is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Am I the only person who considers it interesting that DigitalGlobe is prevented from selling high resolution images by the US while state governments are practically giving away even higher resolution images. This kind of crap is why conspiracy theories are so common. Though, my bets on good old government incompetence.
Umm, what's the point of any of that? That's like saying banks are a ponzi scheme because they constantly screw up paperwork, and don't like to let people withdraw large amounts of money.
Bitcoins are assets. This (DDOS) situation is somewhat like if the bridges to a warehouse/shopping center were deliberately destroyed. The assets are still there, you just can't get to them. Hell, they even have futures markets for the things. The problem is that it's very easy to create you're own exchange, but hard to follow the (deliberately complex) regulations that govern such an exchange.
Just don't wait too long if you're going to look into this. http://science.slashdot.org/st...
The problem is that the legal limit is (in the UK at least) 60 watts. As there lasers will emit many more lumens per watt than the incandescent bulbs in use when the law was written, this doesn't stop them being much too bright.
So what you're saying is lawmakers didn't understand the technology they attempted to regulate, and ended up passing regulations that affect the wrong thing. (lumens vs watts) What a shock. Say it isn't so.
The problem is that overseas aircraft are treated the same as kit built ones by the FAA. They're "experimental" so you don't have to get FAA certified everything, but that's because non US parts normally aren't normally FAA certified, even if they're from the manufacturer. This sounds neat until you realize that these "experimental" aircraft are restricted by the FAA, and you'll be paying an insurance premium. Plus, you now have to worry about finding a mechanic that will work on your plane.
Fortunately, my university's grading policies were well known enough by employers in my field, so that the relatively lower GPA were taken into account when recruiting.
And we have the problem right there. I graduated from a uni like yours*, and like your example the businesses in the area take that kind of thing in question. The problem is for anyone who doesn't want to work in the same area. Unless the school is well known, the recruiter will take one look at your GPA and your application goes in the trash. Hell, some companies require you to apply online. I doubt the system ever even lets a human see the application if your GPA is below a certain number.
*Well, at least one that didn't pull punches when it comes to grading anyways.
It's relatively easy to get those features if you don't mind breaking all backwards compatibility. Which is what Android did.
It gives each separate process it's own UID, but has them all using a common display server. Then you combine the way that almost everything has to be done through the android framework with some special kernel patches. For instance, /etc is normally used for settings files, but that means special things have to be done if you want to mount root as read only. Especially since some of those files, like resolv.conf, must be updated while running.
Most good daemons already run as their own user/group. Android has just moved that from the application to the framework/installer.
On another note, I don't want things to be complicated to the end user. I just want to be able to easily have a read only root partition, and know that it and my kernel hasn't been tampered with evil maid style. I could go with encryption, but that no only eats some CPU, but it destroys DMA. Secure boot makes sure the kernel's ok, and simple file hashing makes sure they haven't been tampered with.
Newer versions of Linux can already do this. Using the integrity measurement architecture, module signing, and Secure Boot it's possible to have a system where almost any change is detected. I'm currently trying to get it all working on my machine right now, but it's slow going. Here's hoping that distros start shipping with this set up by default. http://lwn.net/Articles/488906...
A shorter term security measure that more users/Distributions should take is making the root partition read only. I know Android already does this, but it really does help. Something that I would really like to see is an easy to use per application firewall. Cgroups mean that I don't even have to worry about it just spawning a child process. Yes, I want to play this game in wine. No, I don't want it to access the internet. No, wine refuses to run it as a different user, much less one with lower privileges.
Judges don't take kindly to things like this, plus Evidence Tampering is a separate crime.
Then there's the fruit of the poison tree argument. I don't know about NZ, but here in the US all evidence that comes from illegal evidence is considered illegal. So if the original evidence against Dot Com was illegally obtained by the GCSB, then everything, including all the search warants, is inadmissible. That's probably why it was deleted. When Dot Com's lawyers go to make that argument expect the government to say something like "you have no proof."
Good grief!!! Is this crap still going???
That's the danger of not RTFMing. Or in this case watching the video posted in the comments.
The short answer is "X11 IS NOT NETWORK TRANSPARENT. It's network capable, there's a difference."
X11's "network capability" is something like a per window VNC connection. The typical answer from Wayland devs, who used to be X11 devs, is to just use VNC.
This story reminds me why I don't use GoDaddy and, if you haven't already done so, activate two-factor authentication on your Gmail account.
It's not bulletproof (what is?) but it's an extra layer of security that keeps a hacker from getting control of your email account.
The problem is quite a few of us with our own domains use a per site E-Mail address. It's useful to know that half my spam comes from equifax. Plus some people decide to forgo Gmail Labels and run their own mail server. In either case, when you have control of the domain you have control of all the E-Mails going to that domain. Many websites either don't have a password reset question, or the answer is easy to guess/brute force.
Put another way: Domain control = E-Mail control = Control of almost all your accounts.
SciFi visions of space travel almost always include gravity. And it's not like it's hard to do: Build round space station, spin it.
I assume there's a good reason why we don't make use of the principle to provide astronauts with some semblance of gravity. What is it?
To be fair the main reason SciFi TV shows have gravity is because they're filmed on Earth, and it's expensive to make it look like there's no gravity.
Plus viewers tend to appreciate the acting if the actors aren't upside down or sideways the whole time.
Yes, it's related to the cold, but it also appears to be related to the specific issues of Norway's grid.
Some speculation is that the problem involves too-extreme fluctuations in the electricity provided by that grid and a charger-side software-mediated shutoff of charging. If that's the case, then this might be another charger issue that can be solved with an over-the-air "patch" like some of the previous problems.
While this is definitely a concern for Tesla and their Norwegian customers, it doesn't seem to be relevant to cars in North America.
Well the last patch tried to prevent fires by assuming that if there was too much fluctuation then the contacts were bad.
My predication is the next anti Tesla story reads "Norway Tesla's more likely to catch fire" or something equally stupid.
time to cut full time down maybe 20-32 hours.
Let's start with 32 hours / 4 days a week with an end to the salary no OT pay or maybe a high mini level of pay to have the no OT pay say 100K+ COL
Also an high H-1B min wage say 125k+
Obamacare defines full time as 30+ hours: http://news.investors.com/poli...
So naturally all the places that would rather the government pay for healthcare cut their employees hours down to 29/week. Now they're complaining about not having enough qualified employees.....
When was the last time you saw a Walmart with most of the shelves stocked and the registers open?
Lack of explicit regulation/laws on free speech and lack of free speech are two different things.
In theory that's true, but many parts of the EU outright ban certain speech. For example, I don't like the Nazis and consider them to be horrible; However, when people are prevented from showing their colors to the world they, rightly, think that people are out to get them. So instead of some crazies yelling whatever they want you have people who can only get attention through things like violence.
"There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order." Marginalized people like Neo Nazis* aren't allowed to speak in countries like France and Germany, they know there a minority so voting won't work, and no way that they would be allowed on a Jury. With that in mind it's surprising that we haven't seen more violence out of people like them.
*They're marginalized because they're horrid and nuts, but that just makes them more likely to do something dangerous and crazy.
The EU is also responsible for the Data Retention Directive. Worse, most of their spy agencies are just as bad as the NSA. When you combine that with the lack of free speech in many EU countries it doesn't paint a pretty picture.
They're going to force companies to keep user data on EU soil. Which sounds nice, but that means they can force companies to keep your data for as long as they want and hand it all over to "law enforcement" when you've done something inconvenient. They will then have things like search results censored. (See Google France) I hate to say it, but people in the EU have even less privacy than those of us in the US. Even with/especially because of these privacy directives.
The problem with that is the incumbent corporations have made it illegal to have a coop or municipal option. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband#Controversy
They've effectively bribed the states into giving them a monopoly position. Which then allows them to squeeze their customers dry and use a portion of that money to pay more bribes. Since the US uses a winner takes all election system, and it's nearly impossible to properly research local/state representative candidates they can get away with things like this pretty easily. For clarity, I consider lobbying to be a form of legalized bribery.
Stick them in your satellite launcher cannon and point it in different directions?
You jest, but I'm pretty sure that they were launching cube sats using a spring loaded launcher.
Unless you're sitting still it often lags behind and any realistic movement would guarantee you face would not be hidden. Javascript developers have an odd sense of what real time is.
Javascript and real time should never be used together. For all the improvements by browser vendors javascript is still almost as slow as the US congress.
Being a major industrialised nation with a nuclear power program, Japan has no nuclear research facilities so they're going to do it in downtown Tokyo.
Wait, there's more to Japan than Tokyo?
You'd never guess it by watching half of their movies and TV shows.
Quick guide to binary files. Mostly from my and others work on game saves.
Almost all of them store the size of an array right before the data. This is even true for things like null terminated strings. What gets fun is when you have an array of structs, which then holds an array. Most of those are read in using standard for loops, but an off by one error is still possible. Another (admittedly stupid) possibility is using a string read function that looks for the '\0' character while working with a fixed sized array instead of a true string object. Actually it's really easy for a malformed binary file to have a program attempting to read in gigabytes of data, or for a program that's not perfect to interpret some random number as an array size.
About font files:
Remember that font files tend to be ridiculously complicated. The new ones at least actually run code in a special virtual machine. Given everything that I've said about binary files an just how many Java/Flash/Javascript VM flaws we've seen it's not really surprising.
About X:
Hell, X11 is so complicated I wouldn't be surprised if an arbitrary function could load random fonts via a function call that no toolkit ever uses. At that point you're talking about a normal function with any of the normal error cases.
Pick your poison. There are many possibilities for errors.
The amazing thing is that cppcheck caught it. That means it had to be some static problem with the code.
cppcheck says this code is fine. Try to see why I disagree:
char f(int i,char * data)
{
char array[6];
array[i] = data[i];
return array[0];
}