i install ubuntu few hour before, but i am unable to access hard drive. the message shown is given below- Error mounting /dev/sda6 at /media/jeetu/24386BED386BBD04: Command-line `mount -t "ntfs" -o "uhelper=udisks2,nodev,nosuid,uid=1000,gid=1000,dmask=0077,fmask=0177" "/dev/sda6" "/media/jeetu/24386BED386BBD04"' exited with non-zero exit status 14: The disk contains an unclean file system (0, 0). Metadata kept in Windows cache, refused to mount. Failed to mount '/dev/sda6': Operation not permitted The NTFS partition is in an unsafe state. Please resume and shutdown Windows fully (no hibernation or fast restarting), or mount the volume read-only with the 'ro' mount option.
Whenever I boot Ubuntu, I get a message that it cannot mount my windows partition, and I can choose to either wait, skip or manually mount.  When I try to enter my Windows partition through Nautilus I get a message saying that this partition is hibernated and that I need to enter the file system and properly close it, something I have done with no problem so I don't know why this happens.    Here's my partition table, if any more data is needed please let me know.     Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System /dev/sda1            2048    20000767     9999360   83  Linux /dev/sda2        20002814   478001151   228999169    5  Extended /dev/sda3   *   478001152   622532607    72265728    7  HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda4       622532608   625141759     1304576   82  Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda5        20002816   478001151   228999168   83  Linux
Why can't I do foreach (var Item in DataTable.Rows)? Which transformations are canonical? Which transformations are ? home socket with DC voltage I'm wondering why, in a standard house, instead of using many low power AC-DC rectifier, there isn't a big (like 12V 20~50A) AC-DC rectifier which supplies some wall socket with a DC voltage? In the long run this should be less expensive, given the fact that AC to DC in one big apparatus is done better than in many low-quality transformers, right?  Also, modern chip DC voltage regulators have efficiency of >90%, so smaller (or even larger) voltages are still efficient and possible.  So we could use a 12V socket to charge a phone, desktop computer, laptop, radio etc... and still have an AC socket to move washing machine engine and other things that work better with an AC supply.  Why isn't this done?  edit: real question is: is it convenient, given a standard family (2 laptop, 1 desktop, 4 smarthpone, 1 big tv and some minor electonic) to do so? Use of inequality $1 - \cos (x) \leq x^2 /2$ In  answer the value of $1 - \cos(x)$ has to be evaluated in order to find its upper limit, if it exists.  In particular, $x = 2 \pi / n$. The answer is related to the length of a side of a regular $n$-gon inscribed into a unit-radius circumference; because the perimeter of the $n$-gon is always less than $2 \pi$, the single side must always be less than $2 \pi / n$.  The inequality  $$1 - \cos (x) \leq \displaystyle \frac{x^2}{2}$$ (1)  is used and the proof is completed with   $$2(1 - \cos(x)) \leq (2 \pi / n)^2$$  $$\sqrt{2(1 - \cos(x))} \leq 2 \pi / n$$  But it is well known that the cosine is a function $f(x) \in [-1;1]$, so $1 - \cos (x) \in [0,2]$. By using this information, we would obtain  $$1 - \cos (x) \leq 2$$ (2)  The proof would provide  $$2(1 - \cos(x)) \leq 4$$  $$\sqrt{2(1 - \cos(x))} \leq 2$$  which is a completely different result.   Why in that case it is preferable to use (1) instead of (2)? How to choose when it is convenient to use (1) and when to use (2) in a proof? Date api for managing off days in an year? I have a scenario. (Windows Forms, C#, .NET)   There is a main form which hosts some user control. The user control does some heavy data operation, such that if I directly call the UserControl_Load method the UI become nonresponsive for the duration for load method execution. To overcome this I load data on different thread (trying to change existing code as little as I can)   I used a background worker thread which will be loading the data and when done will notify the application that it has done its work.   Now came a real problem. All the UI (main form and its child usercontrols) was created on the primary main thread. In the LOAD method of the usercontrol I'm fetching data based on the values of some control (like textbox) on userControl.    The pseudocode would look like this:  CODE 1  UserContrl1_LoadDataMethod() {     if (textbox1.text == "MyName") // This gives exception     {         //Load data corresponding to "MyName".         //Populate a globale variable List&lt;string&gt; which will be binded to grid at some later stage.     } }   The Exception it gave was     Cross-thread operation not valid: Control accessed from a thread other than the thread it was created on.   To know more about this I did some googling and a suggestion came up like using the following code  CODE 2  UserContrl1_LoadDataMethod() {     if (InvokeRequired) // Line #1     {         this.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(UserContrl1_LoadDataMethod));         return;     }      if (textbox1.text == "MyName") // Now it wont give an exception     {     //Load data correspondin to "MyName"         //Populate a globale variable List&lt;string&gt; which will be binded to grid at some later stage     } }   BUT BUT BUT... it seems I'm back to square one. The Application again  become nonresponsive. It seems to be due to the execution of line #1 if condition. The loading task is again done by the parent thread and not the third that I spawned.  I don't know whether I perceived this right or wrong. I'm new to threading.  How do I resolve this and also what is the effect of execution of Line#1 if block?  The situation is this: I want to load data into a global variable based on the value of a control. I don't want to change the value of a control from the child thread. I'm not going to do it ever from a child thread.   So only accessing the value so that the corresponding data can be fetched from the database. What is wrong with this query? (Unknown error parsing query) Why can't I define a default constructor for a struct in .NET? I need to (permanent) redirect all of the following:   www.example.com www.example.com/folder sub.example.com sub.example.com/folder   Basically, all URLs that are reachable without being intended to: www.new-example.com, I want to do this within Apache and using the mod_rewrite module via the .htaccess file. Current sensing nA to mA I need to sense the current of a target  through various periods of its on/sleep/off state and then need to send this data back to another interface MCU to read out the value. They will be both on the same board, powered by 5&nbsp;V USB.  However these are the requirements I have:   5&nbsp;V USB PSU Must be able to sense currents in the range of nA to mA with high    accuracy/precision. (I figure 1&nbsp;nA to 500&nbsp;mA) Only measure the current of the target MCU and not the interface. Must output maximum 3.3&nbsp;V interface MCU   I have looked at available options and current sense amplifiers by Texas Instruments can't sense nA due to higher bias currents. So therefore I feel I would need a precision amplifier.  However I am stuck on how to proceed with this because, I need to somehow have a automatic dynamic current range and I am fairly new to current sensing and am not really sure on all the specifics. are used by the Empire in a manner that is tactically identical to how a modern day army would use a tank, in that they are used as shock armour with powerful main guns which will punch through entrenched positions. (No combined arms tactics were used in the Battle of Hoth, but that's a different question altogether)  However, AT-AT walkers have a number of (rather lethal) drawbacks and no advantages that I can see compared to tanks.    They have footpads in place of treads, which greatly increase their ground pressure, and which will cause them to easily sink as compared to treads They have a high center of gravity and can be easily tripped, which was exploited in the Battle of Hoth. (granted that this was canonically presented as an oversight, albeit a rather stupid one, since most martial arts strongly emphasise lowering your CG.) They are slower than a modern main battle tank despite their long legs, which one would normally expect to grant additional mobility (max speed 60km/h on flat terrain, compared to 72km/h on flat terrain for the ). This is exacerbated by the fact that AT-AT walkers are using fusion power cells as compared to diesel engines.   It would seem that it would make far more sense for the Empire to remove the legs and mount the main chassis on treads, which would make the vehicle far more effective. Why then, did they not do this? It clearly was not the case that imperial Engineers lacked imagination, as they did produce .   Possible answers which I find implausible as advantages:  1: AT-AT walkers are tall, and therefore have a surveying advantage over the battlefield / have a better vantage point to fire from  Orbital satellites can provide the observation, and in any case air/orbital support should always be called in, especially if fire support from above is required. I'm reading through a proof in my lecture notes:     Every convergent sequence of a metric space has a unique limit.   Suppose $\lim_{n \to \infty} x_n = l$ and $\lim_{n \to \infty} x_n = m.$ Then for every $\epsilon &gt; 0,$ there exists $N$ such that for every $n \geqslant N,$  $$d(l,m) \leqslant d(l,x_n) + d(x_n,m) &lt; \epsilon + \epsilon = 2 \epsilon. $$  So $(\star) \hspace{1mm} 0 \leqslant \frac{d(l,m)}{2} &lt; \epsilon \Longrightarrow \hspace{1mm} (\star^\prime) \hspace{1mm} \frac{d(l,m)}{2} =0 \Longrightarrow l = m.$  I can follow the proof up until the jump from $(\star)$ to $(\star^\prime)$. Why does $\frac{d(l,m)}{2}=0$? What is the moment of a joint random variable? Simple question, yet surprisingly difficult to find an answer online.  I know that for a RV $X$, we define the kth moment as $$\int X^k \ d P = \int x^k f(x) \ dx$$ where the equality follows if $p = f \cdot m$, for a density $f$ and Lebesgue measure $m$.  So, what is the kth moment of, say, $(X,Y)$? $\int (X,Y) \ d P$ doesn't really seem like the answer to me.... Test Class Apex Page Parameters Reading order for Dragonlance? Using RegEX To Prefix And Append In Notepad++ I have quite a large list of words in a txt file and I'm trying to do a regex find and replace in Notepad++. I need to add a string before each line and after each line.. So that:   wordone wordtwo wordthree   become   able:"wordone" able:"wordtwo" able:"wordthree"   How can I do this? Proof that every metric space is normal How to imitate commercial fried chicken? I'm trying to develop my own "secret" fried chicken recipe, something that is similar to Popeye's or Church's. I'm a LONG ways from getting there. Here's what I did in my last experiment:   Chicken was marinated in buttermilk with Cajun spices and Tabasco sauce for 24 hours I used a deep fryer and canola oil. 175C. Prior to "dressing" the chicken, I let the excess buttermilk brine drip off the chicken. I then seasoned it with Cajun seasoning I made a batter using an egg, self rising flour, milk, baking powder I also tried using just plain flour for breading   Results:   Using the batter, the chicken came out looking burned and too smooth (didn't have that crunchy look). It burned too much that I couldn't finish cooking the chicken. Using the flour, the chicken came out with a thin crust, somewhat crispy, but also too burnt. Dipping the chicken in the batter AND then flour gave a bulky &amp; crunchy look. However, again, the result looked too burnt.   Modifications:  I then changed the the breading. I used bread flour and corn starch. I dipped the chicken in the batter again, then used the new breading. The bread flour was a bit lighter. And the corn starch was even more lighter. But they were still burn looking (just lighter shades). I also dropped the temperature to 160C.  Results:  Burnt chicken whose crust wasn't really sticking to the skin/meat.  Questions:  Any suggestions on what I can do to improve? I'm guessing something in the batter is causing the burnt coat. What flour should I use? What can I do to make the coat stick to the skin/meat? Any other suggestions on what to do? Dimensions of symmetric and skew-symmetric matrices What happens when a caster targets an object that looks like a creature with a spell that targets only creatures? There are many spells which explicitly target creatures:     Choose one creature within range   The target creature is normally supposed to make a saving throw in this case.  What happens when the caster chooses a creature, that is actually an object? For instance, a scarecrow, a mannequin, an illusion, or a corpse.  Examples:   An evil mage is hiding in the bushes. He casts an illusion of himself on the road, using the Silent Image spell. A PC sorcerer walks down the road, sees the illusion and casts Magic Missile on it. A cleric is standing near a pile of dead bodies. He has suspicions that a few corpses are actually undead creatures. He casts Sacred Flame on every corpse, see which if them succeed, hence, reveals the undead. A wizard casts Acid Splash on a mannequin, trying to damage it with acid.   Possible outcomes I can think of are:   The caster cannot even try to cast the spell, regardless of their information about what the target actually is. The caster tries to cast the spell, the casting fails, not expending the spell slot. The caster casts the spell, it expends the spell slot, then fails. The caster casts the spell, but it hits the original and not the illusion. The caster casts the spell, it flies to the target illusion but deals no damage to it (passes through it).   References in the rules and Sage advice  I was trying to investigate, but it didn't make things clearer:    has an answer, that Magic Missile won't hit. It says nothing about if it can be targeted at all, it leaves it up to the DM. Magic Missile automatically finds the original, even when the caster targets an illusion. At least . Now . This supports the counter-intuitive option 4.   on the other hand   , if there were no perceivable effects (let's say you can try to cast the Command spell on an illusion). That assumes that casters can waste their spells on illusion, which means they at least can target it. This supports options 3 and 5.