On Wednesday 24 October 2001 20:36, you wrote: > > > I note that WinVNC (http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/) has a tool > > > which allows you to install it as a service in Windows 2000 and Windows > > > NT, the same thing would seem to make clear sense for the Windows > > > Freenet release. The source code for doing this may be available on > > > the WinVNC website - can we do this? > > > > Any executable can be run as a service on NT (and presumably 2000) via a > > wrapper included in the NT resource kit (SRVANY.EXE). IIRC Tomcat > > application > > > server can be run this way so Freenet should work also. > > Not strictly true... SRVANY has its limitations and there are certain > things that the executable that it runs cannot do otherwise it won't work. > Here are some problems with making Freenet run as a service on Windows: > > o The freenet systray application assumes the node runs like any normal > executable file. In fact the freenet systray application stops and > restarts the node at will Could the systray applet not simply execute appropriate "net.exe start <service>" or "net.exe stop <service>" to start and stop the node service?
> o The freenet systray application actually spawns the node in GUI mode > but hides the GUI window the node creates. It does this so that it can > send a WM_SYSCOMMAND[SC_CLOSE] to the node window to shut the node down > (can you think of a better way to shut down the node?) > o The freenet systray application (and the node as a result of previous > point) both need to create windows, sometimes hidden ones, and interact > with the desktop and the user. These are generally bad things for services > to do. (What do I know, hell, I only write services daily). Who knows > what might happen (not me, cos I haven't tried running freenet as a service > yet) > > It could be that SRVANY works fine for freenet.exe , I don't have it at > home so I can't try it out. > What I would therefore prefer to do is write a server wrapper for the java > node, and modify freenet.exe to communicate with this wrapper rather than > the node itself. Obviously this won't work on Windows 9x (well, probably > not), so freenet.exe would need fall back to its original behaviour in such > a case. > That way, we have a non-GUI application (the freenet node, implemented as > an .exe (with service entry points) which is itself just a wrapper for the > java node) and a GUI 'control panel' (what freenet.exe currently is, > effectively) > > Thoughts? (sounds good to me). > BTW - obviously, if SRVANY does work, then go with that for now, but it > really is a highly undesirable solution. And writing our own services > really ain't that hard. > > Dave > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
