On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 19:50, Matthew Toseland
<toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote:
> On Monday 21 June 2010 23:04:19 ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason wrote:
>> Unfortunately I've found that:
>>
>> ? ? - It takes a lot of resources, mainly in memory & IO. So it's not
>> ? ? ? very VPS friendly.
>
>
> True. The amount of disk I/O freenet uses in particular is
> unacceptable not only for VPSs but for desktops too. Fixing this is
> well up the priorities list.
I actually managed to get this down to nothing my using the in-memory
store, but of course then I'm limited by RAM in what I can store.
>> ? ? - The web interface for it isn't very friendly, and in general
>> ? ? ? it's fairly monolithic.
>
> Any suggestions or specific comments would be very welcome.
There's the use of meta-refresh everywhere instead of something like
AJAX, although I saw that that was being worked on. I turned it on but
it only worked for some things, i.e. only downloads and not searches
(or was it the other way around) ...
> I'm not sure what you mean by monolithic - there *is* a deliberate
> design decision to integrate as much functionality as possible into
> fproxy via plugins, to make life easy for new users.
I mainly mean that it's its own big large Java-app like thing, and it
appears that any interaction I do with it (if I don't want to script
my own FPC-client) is via the web interface, or some specialized
program.
I'd be really neat if there were a bunch of freenet command-line
programs with an interface similar to Git, then I could do e.g.:
@daily find /politics -type f -exec freenet insert {} \;
I realize I could do this via FPC, but it'd be really neat if there
was more integration with other tools like that in general. Or if
someone not as lazy as myself would write a FPC command-line
interface.
Another example is the fproxy scrubbing of pages for JavaScript
content, which I couldn't find a way to disable. I understand the
security concerns behind that, but maybe I'm just using a Darknet with
some friends and we like writing JavaScript pages, and all run Freenet
within locked down VM's.
With Tor I can just talk to the tor daemon directly without going
through fproxy, I couldn't find any Freenet equivalent of that.
>> ? ? - It's a bit of an overkill for what I wanted, which was a roaming
>> ? ? ? cache of data between me and a few friends.
>
> :) Good hunting, I hope you can find something more appropriate.
>>
>> I don't mean the above disrespectfully, I'm just pre-emting the "but
>> why" question.
>>
>> FWIW I'm currently checking out GNUNet which has much lower resource
>> use and seems to have better command-line integration, and uses stuff
>> like PGP.
I've still been too lazy to check out GNUNet properly, but someday
.. :)
