Oops, I didn't see Andreas' last e-mail went to my junk folder. Sorry to hear 10.10.1 doesn't help.
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Tim Perry <tim.v...@gmail.com> wrote: > I just received the following from DropBox and it seemed like it *might* > be relevant: > > We’re reaching out to let you know about an issue in Apple’s new OS X > Yosemite that causes problems withDropbox. You can resolve this issue by > installing the latest Software Update for OS X Yosemite. > > OS X Yosemite may occasionally cause some programs to crash when you > open, save-as, or first save a file. These crashes are rare but happen when > an application, such asDropbox, uses Yosemite’s official Finder > integration — and if that program crashes because of this interaction, > unsaved changes may be lost. > > To fix this issue, Apple has released OS X Update 10.10.1. This update is > available for free in the Mac App Store. Details on how to update your Mac > are available onApple’s support site <http://support.apple.com/HT1338>. > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Andreas Noback <m...@noback.info> wrote: > >> Hi Greg, >> >> thank you for the quick response. I suspected that it is a bug from Apple >> and was hoping that the update today (10.10.1) would change something, but >> it does not. In general the Yosemite release seems to me buggier that the >> last couple of major updates, so it could be wise to avoid it for a while >> ... >> >> Best, >> Andreas >> >> >> > Am 18.11.2014 um 18:58 schrieb Gregory J. Ward <gregoryjw...@gmail.com >> >: >> > >> > Hi Andreas, >> > >> > A quick follow-up to this. I tried it out on my copy of Yosemite, and >> confirmed the problem. It seems to be an intermittent problem with the >> system select() call, which means there's little I can do about it except >> hope Apple recognizes the issue and posts a patch at some point. The last >> change I made in this code related to a hanging condition was in 1997, and >> it's been working across Unix implementations since then. >> > >> > For now, I can only suggest you avoid multiprocessing until the next >> patch release. You can try reporting a bug to Apple, but without a simple >> test case to reproduce it, they are unlikely to do anything other than >> register the complaint. I haven't seen anything on the net about it, yet. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > -Greg >> > >> >> From: "Gregory J. Ward" <gregoryjw...@gmail.com> >> >> Subject: Re: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite >> >> Date: November 18, 2014 8:10:48 AM PST >> >> >> >> HI Andreas, >> >> >> >> I am sorry to hear about this issue, and it is unlikely that there is >> any way to debug it. A hung process doesn't respond to debugging, either! >> >> >> >> The best approach is to kill one of the processes using "kill -QUIT" >> and seeing if it leaves behind a diagnostic file in >> $HOME/Library/Logs/CrashReporter/. Then at least, we may find out what >> routine it is hanging in. >> >> >> >> The only other idea I had is to disable "App Nap" system-wide to see >> if this is causing the problem. See: >> >> >> >> http://www.defaults-write.com/10-9-disable-app-nap-in-os-x >> >> >> >> I don't know why this would affect non-application processes, or why >> it would present an issue in 10.10 if it wasn't an issue in 10.9, but it's >> worth a try. >> >> >> >> I will see if I can reproduce this on my copy of Yosemite as well. >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> -Greg >> >> >> >>> From: Andreas Noback <m...@noback.info> >> >>> Subject: [Radiance-dev] MacOS Yosemite >> >>> Date: November 18, 2014 1:25:27 AM PST >> >>> >> >>> Dear List, >> >>> >> >>> has someone experience with radiance and new MacOS 10.10? I tried it >> and got some unpleasant results: If you start rad with the -N option (for >> example: rad -N 4 -o x11 -v hem test.rif) it start as usual, but after a >> few seconds it seems to stuck, i. e. not responding to input, no further >> refining, no processor load. The processes seem to be waiting for something >> (forever): >> >>> >> >>> 1447 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -o x11 -v hem test.rif >> >>> 1450 s000 S+ 0:00.03 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 >> -vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 - >> >>> 1452 s000 S+ 0:00.25 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 >> -vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 - >> >>> 1453 s000 S+ 0:00.24 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 >> -vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 - >> >>> 1454 s000 S+ 0:00.24 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 >> -vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 - >> >>> 1455 s000 S+ 0:00.28 rvu -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 >> -vh 180 -vv 180 -vo 0 -va 0 -vs 0 -vl 0 -dp 512 - >> >>> >> >>> Similar things happen if you use it without -o x11 (rad -N 4 -v hem >> test.rif): some process start, parts of the image will be rendered. Than >> the load goes to zero and nothing happens any more. Here you can see some >> zombies: >> >>> >> >>> 1315 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif >> >>> 1318 s000 Z+ 0:00.00 (rad) >> >>> 1325 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms >> 0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab >> >>> 1408 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif >> >>> 1409 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj >> -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v >> >>> 1410 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms >> 0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab >> >>> 1411 s000 Z+ 0:00.00 (rpict) >> >>> 1412 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rad -N 4 -v hem test.rif >> >>> 1413 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj >> -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v >> >>> 1414 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms >> 0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab >> >>> 1416 s000 S+ 0:00.01 rpiece -F test_hem_rpsync.txt -PP pfM4wGSj >> -vth -vp 0 0 0.001 -vd 0 0 1 -vu 0 1 0 -vh 180 -v >> >>> 1417 s000 S+ 0:00.00 rpict -S 1 -PP pfM4wGSj -dp 512 -ar 32 -ms >> 0.05 -ds .3 -dt .1 -dc .5 -dr 1 -ss 1 -st .1 -ab >> >>> >> >>> There is nothing in the logs. I got the same results with the >> precompiled binaries and binaries compiled from the head revision under >> 10.10 with Xcode 6.1. >> >>> >> >>> Any suggestions? >> >>> >> >>> Andreas Noback >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Radiance-dev mailing list >> > Radiance-dev@radiance-online.org >> > http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Radiance-dev mailing list >> Radiance-dev@radiance-online.org >> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev >> > >
_______________________________________________ Radiance-dev mailing list Radiance-dev@radiance-online.org http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
