Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > Using the current wininstaller (FreenetInstaller-1210), I installed > into Windows 7 x64 Build 7100. Installed java as prompted (x32). > Install went very well. The uninstaller leaves user 'Freenet' and I > updated my open ticket(bug) with these results. Your bug at https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=3113 is a duplicate of https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=3080 ;). But you are correct. The issue has been discussed a couple of times already. The problem is that there is no easy/proper way of deleting the user folder. For some reason, Windows does not provide an easy way of doing this. Googling the issue will reveal that many people have stumbled upon this problem before us. At the moment, we include a third-party tool that correctly deletes the profile folder on Windows XP and earlier. We haven't yet found one that works for Vista as well. > Freenet found that I had Chrome installed and used it, even though > it was not my default browser.Bug/Feature? That is actually a feature :). The launcher has a prioritized list of browsers it will look for, and use if found. Chrome is a lot more secure than IE (for example) and supports incognito mode, hence it is higher prioritized. Maybe we should inform the user of this in someway. Hmm... - Zero3 ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Using the current wininstaller (FreenetInstaller-1210), I installed into Windows 7 x64 Build 7100. Installed java as prompted (x32). Install went very well. The uninstaller leaves user 'Freenet' and I updated my open ticket(bug) with these results. Freenet found that I had Chrome installed and used it, even though it was not my default browser.Bug/Feature? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Charset: UTF8 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 3.0 wkYEARECAAYFAkoPUi8ACgkQDAg0OvA3V4BvTACfctkSvN531D0WN5mDSyFd1bcTCHMA n0Fmqx36EEj+tFzptUzTxsAYgtwX =Wrc+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Free information on a POS system that meets your needs. Click here. http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/BLSrjkqZugEikWAyHtCFVznVXfLKxokMTdj0gKb01Zq8iQxm3rynr2M6HnC/ ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > One other thing, When the uninstaller runs, it does not remove the > freenet user it created. I had multiple users named freenet, > freenet.001, freenet.002 etc. Which installer? The new (single GUI screen) or old (several pages) one? The new one should definitely remove the user in the uninstaller. - Zero3 ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 12 May 2009 13:45:49 -0600 Zero3 wrote: >> 2nd Install, with java pre-installed (32/64 bit) >> >> 1. Freenet installer as Administrator >> 2. Java detected, taking default install options > >Did the installer correctly detect your 64-bit Java installation? >I thought it didn't do that last time? No, it detected the 32 bit only. >> 6. Up and running. One small oddity, I accessed the same index >page >> as above, but this time I had to go to it three times to get the >> latest, most current version. Will this cause confusion with new >> users that they sometimes can get old content from the main >page? >Was it a very old version, or the second latest? Your node probably >found the second latest version first, and transparently replaced >it with the latest one once it stumbled upon it. This is quite >normal. It shouldn't happen for long though, as all nodes should >update their copies as soon as they "hear about" the new one. What I thought odd was that it actually updated to a newer version twice. So rather than jump from an old edition to the latest, it hit an intermediate one on the way. >> 7. Not installer related, but upon uninstalling w/ option to >do >> survey, the survey errored out with: "Something bad happened. >Don't >> worry, though. The Spreadsheets Team has been notified and we'll >> get right on it." This was from IE as it is still set as the >> default browser. (but not for long) > >Sounds like an error from Google (who hosts the survey >spreadsheet). >Should fix itself once they figure out what's wrong. > >- Zero3 >___ >Devl mailing list >Devl@freenetproject.org >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl One other thing, When the uninstaller runs, it does not remove the freenet user it created. I had multiple users named freenet, freenet.001, freenet.002 etc. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Charset: UTF8 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 3.0 wkYEARECAAYFAkoMwGIACgkQDAg0OvA3V4CVvQCeJzWiJgktGIbzYkPYHvnlOnTgIgkA oLam3uDUEk5kOVLbUaXcCbUlHFd1 =uaFh -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Click now to find great remedies for hangovers! http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/BLSrjkqgbosfv6exDo267TAOeZk0jO08ZuqcrGR1xUsPmLVOqjezTaJ1bTS/ ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > 4. Only sees IE as I use portable FF. Makes sense. I doubt the portable FF adds any kind of indication that it is available? (Registry key or the like, which we could look for in the browser search done in the launcher) > > 2nd Install, with java pre-installed (32/64 bit) > > 1. Freenet installer as Administrator > 2. Java detected, taking default install options Did the installer correctly detect your 64-bit Java installation? I thought it didn't do that last time? > 6. Up and running. One small oddity, I accessed the same index page > as above, but this time I had to go to it three times to get the > latest, most current version. Will this cause confusion with new > users that they sometimes can get old content from the main page? Was it a very old version, or the second latest? Your node probably found the second latest version first, and transparently replaced it with the latest one once it stumbled upon it. This is quite normal. It shouldn't happen for long though, as all nodes should update their copies as soon as they "hear about" the new one. > 7. Not installer related, but upon uninstalling w/ option to do > survey, the survey errored out with: "Something bad happened. Don't > worry, though. The Spreadsheets Team has been notified and we'll > get right on it." This was from IE as it is still set as the > default browser. (but not for long) Sounds like an error from Google (who hosts the survey spreadsheet). Should fix itself once they figure out what's wrong. - Zero3 ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 11 May 2009 17:07:14 -0600 Matthew Toseland wrote: >We have removed the memory limit option in git ... Ignoring the memory issue/non-issue, here is my install testing today: Installed version of Java: java version "1.6.0_13" Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_13-b03) Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 11.3-b02, mixed mode) 1. Freenet installer as Administrator 2. Asks for Java 1.5 or greater, installing. 3. Taking default install options 4. Only sees IE as I use portable FF. 5. Switch to FF after configuration. 6. Did not see is ask for a node name.(probably due to using wizard vs manual install) 7. Install took the BW changes, but memory adjustments ignored.(Was suggested possible access rights issue to wrapper.conf) 8. Up and running: Peer statistics * Connected: 3 * Busy: 2 * Never connected: 5 * Seed nodes: 4 Took less than 2 minutes to bring up one of the indexes (The Ultimate Freenet Index). Error in wrapper: (known non-issue I believe) STATUS | wrapper | 2009/05/12 | Freenet background service installed. STATUS | wrapper | 2009/05/12 | --> Wrapper Started as Service STATUS | wrapper | 2009/05/12 | Java Service Wrapper Community Edition 3.3.3 STATUS | wrapper | 2009/05/12 | Copyright (C) 1999-2009 Tanuki Software, Ltd. All Rights Reserved. STATUS | wrapper | 2009/05/12 | http://wrapper.tanukisoftware.org STATUS | wrapper | 2009/05/12 | STATUS | wrapper | 2009/05/12 | Launching a JVM... INFO | jvm 1| 2009/05/12 | WrapperManager: Initializing... INFO | jvm 1| 2009/05/12 | WrapperManager: WARNING - The Wrapper jar file currently in use is version "3.3.1" INFO | jvm 1| 2009/05/12 | WrapperManager: while the version of the Wrapper which launched this JVM is INFO | jvm 1| 2009/05/12 | WrapperManager: "3.3.3". INFO | jvm 1| 2009/05/12 | WrapperManager: The Wrapper may appear to work correctly but some features may INFO | jvm 1| 2009/05/12 | WrapperManager: not function correctly. This configuration has not been tested INFO | jvm 1| 2009/05/12 | WrapperManager: and is not supported. 9.Install was quick easy and painless. Shut node down via browser, then started it via the destop shortcut. All is well. Input Rate: 101 KiB/sec (of 256 KiB) Output Rate: 6.39 KiB/sec (of 64.0 KiB) Total Input: 1.56 MiB (16.7 KiB/sec) Total Output: 739 KiB (7.70 KiB/sec) Payload Output: 383 KiB (3.98 KiB/sec)(51%) 10. Uninstalled, shortcut still on destop. Nope, F5(refresh) and it's gone. 2nd Install, with java pre-installed (32/64 bit) 1. Freenet installer as Administrator 2. Java detected, taking default install options 3. Cut/paste url into FF to continue at this point. 4. Receive warning about using same brower for Internet/Freenet. 5. Same issues as 6/7 above. 6. Up and running. One small oddity, I accessed the same index page as above, but this time I had to go to it three times to get the latest, most current version. Will this cause confusion with new users that they sometimes can get old content from the main page? 7. Not installer related, but upon uninstalling w/ option to do survey, the survey errored out with: "Something bad happened. Don't worry, though. The Spreadsheets Team has been notified and we'll get right on it." This was from IE as it is still set as the default browser. (but not for long) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Charset: UTF8 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 3.0 wkYEARECAAYFAkoJkysACgkQDAg0OvA3V4CWmQCgu1Gk4lu6RjglBVRobtuIVtBxZOcA n09Kc0eWzu7eVxsWk7/mehdrHura =HK/U -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Put your future on the fast track with a pharmacy career. Click now! http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/BLSrjkqZ0UM9sRv6ore3dQnafUlaqZLbMCvOfOvJdzlKKwHZwUzqqwb5Pmo/ ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
On Friday 08 May 2009 19:15:46 gh...@hushmail.com wrote: > > On Fri, 08 May 2009 05:51:58 -0600 Zero3 > wrote: > >Hey > > > >You seem to have tested the *old* Windows installer, which > >unfortunately > >doesn't work on Vista. If you can, please test the new one from > >the link > >from toad's mail :). > > > >- Zero3 > > > The good: > Under Vista64 the installer does produce a functioning node. Great! > > The bad: > Wrapper.conf seems to not get an update from wizard mode. Maximum > memory was still default of 192 and not the 512 I had set. If I do > a new install and configure it manually rather than using the > wizard, after a node reboot I can see the changes. A reboot after > the wizard install does not. Permissions problem, surely? > > The unfortunate: > The installer does not see existing 64 bit java installs under the > Vista OS. The option to install java only installs the 32 bit java. > This works and allows the install to complete but now you have both > 32/64 bit jre's. :| Better than nothing. > > The messy workaround: > After the node is installed and working, shut it down. > Uninstall the 32 bit java. > Start-run-cmd, then cd to %windir%\syswow64. > There create three symbolic links to the 64 bit java in > %windir%\system32. > mklink java.exe ..\system32\java.exe > mklink javaw.exe ..\system32\javaw.exe > mklinik javaws.exe ..\system32\javaws.exe > Restart the node. > (I believe these links will break if java is ever updated and need > to be recreated manually at that point in time.) Nice, a desktop version of Windows with support for symlinks. > > > Thoughts: > The installer cannot be spoofed by the symbolic links alone, only > after a completed install is done can the freenet software be ran > under a 64 bit java. > > Could the installer be revised to detect a 64 bit OS? Also > adjusting for 64 bit java detection and it's possible download > accordingly? > > The options to make changes to the wrapper don't happen when using > the wizard. Can this be fixed or should it be removed and then > after the node is up remind the user to adjust memory usage if > he/she wants and then to reboot the node. We have removed the memory limit option in git ... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
On Sunday 10 May 2009 00:54:48 Luke771 wrote: > Zero3 wrote: > > gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > > > >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, 08 May 2009 05:51:58 -0600 Zero3 > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hey > >>> > >>> You seem to have tested the *old* Windows installer, which > >>> unfortunately > >>> doesn't work on Vista. If you can, please test the new one from > >>> the link > >>> > >> >from toad's mail :). > >> > >>> - Zero3 > >>> > >> The good: > >> Under Vista64 the installer does produce a functioning node. > >> > > > > Great! What about the problems you mentioned in your previous mail? (I > > just replied to those in another message) > > > > > >> The bad: > >> Wrapper.conf seems to not get an update from wizard mode. Maximum > >> memory was still default of 192 and not the 512 I had set. If I do > >> a new install and configure it manually rather than using the > >> wizard, after a node reboot I can see the changes. A reboot after > >> the wizard install does not. > >> > > > > We already have a couple of bugs reported in that area. You probably hit > > one of them: > > https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2500 > > https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2573 > > > > > >> The unfortunate: > >> The installer does not see existing 64 bit java installs under the > >> Vista OS. The option to install java only installs the 32 bit java. > >> This works and allows the install to complete but now you have both > >> 32/64 bit jre's. > >> > > > > OK - see previous mail. > > > > > > > >> The messy workaround: > >> After the node is installed and working, shut it down. > >> Uninstall the 32 bit java. > >> Start-run-cmd, then cd to %windir%\syswow64. > >> There create three symbolic links to the 64 bit java in > >> %windir%\system32. > >> mklink java.exe ..\system32\java.exe > >> mklink javaw.exe ..\system32\javaw.exe > >> mklinik javaws.exe ..\system32\javaws.exe > >> Restart the node. > >> (I believe these links will break if java is ever updated and need > >> to be recreated manually at that point in time.) > >> > >> > >> Thoughts: > >> The installer cannot be spoofed by the symbolic links alone, only > >> after a completed install is done can the freenet software be ran > >> under a 64 bit java. > >> > >> Could the installer be revised to detect a 64 bit OS? Also > >> adjusting for 64 bit java detection and it's possible download > >> accordingly? > >> > >> The options to make changes to the wrapper don't happen when using > >> the wizard. Can this be fixed or should it be removed and then > >> after the node is up remind the user to adjust memory usage if > >> he/she wants and then to reboot the node. > >> > > > > As previously mentioned: Does anyone know how to handle this 32-bit vs. > > 64-bit stuff? What to do? (I have no idea, and nothing to test 64-bit > > stuff on). > > > OK, I _know_ I'm gonna say something stupid but I have to, so here it goes: > > Joe Cynical suggests: the average user probably wouldnt be bothered by > having both a 32-bit and a 64-bit JRE's, especially if told that he's > supposed to. > Make "simple install" just install JRE automatically and "expert mode" > let the user manually give the path to his JRE. IMHO it should work in any case. But it does, so there is no great urgency to fix it. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
On Friday 08 May 2009 15:12:33 gh...@hushmail.com wrote: > Both installers were from toad's links yesterday. One earlier in > the day and the second around four hours later (with a slightly > different file size). Here is the MD5 generated on both files. > a8f88c158cc3927cdc786b67150b86f9 and > 4fb8e9ff969d7c2b0575aa370874cf89. > > I'm more than happy to give it another go or two or three. Once > I've had a bit more coffee... New version, should include update.cmd: 8854028 2009-05-11 23:54 FreenetInstaller-1209.exe md5: 23e1b4ef70b1bd35ba2fc32fbc54637f sha256: 00461dd83d9b0370d9f59fabe00168966ef5e6c5ad2d6b588a4d5f3036b304aa signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 >Joe Cynical suggests: the average user probably wouldnt be >bothered by >having both a 32-bit and a 64-bit JRE's, especially if told that >he's >supposed to. >Make "simple install" just install JRE automatically and "expert >mode" >let the user manually give the path to his JRE. > >___ >Devl mailing list >Devl@freenetproject.org >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl You have got a point. I may have been a bit more sensitive to this as this was my first jump into 64 bit Vista. I had my mind centered around '64 bit or nothing'. I've now had my old node migrated and all is running fine. As an aside, I was looking at 64 bit compiles of Firefox 3.0.10 (Minefield?) but when I read that all my current addons would not be compatible I let that go as well. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Charset: UTF8 Version: Hush 3.0 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wkYEARECAAYFAkoHgwYACgkQDAg0OvA3V4C4sgCgtq4pRdsWakDyGEdS6tZG5JJlJwkA nRNQL65BV86DuNrVo5tGr+SROOca =GZZ3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Compete with the big boys. Click here to find products to benefit your business. http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/BLSrjkqenc14eIdMkkAIgiYczMayTjw00gD9r7vtUyTnIyLLrGkF2A7rQ3W/ ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
Zero3 wrote: > gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> >> On Fri, 08 May 2009 05:51:58 -0600 Zero3 >> wrote: >> >>> Hey >>> >>> You seem to have tested the *old* Windows installer, which >>> unfortunately >>> doesn't work on Vista. If you can, please test the new one from >>> the link >>> >> >from toad's mail :). >> >>> - Zero3 >>> >> The good: >> Under Vista64 the installer does produce a functioning node. >> > > Great! What about the problems you mentioned in your previous mail? (I > just replied to those in another message) > > >> The bad: >> Wrapper.conf seems to not get an update from wizard mode. Maximum >> memory was still default of 192 and not the 512 I had set. If I do >> a new install and configure it manually rather than using the >> wizard, after a node reboot I can see the changes. A reboot after >> the wizard install does not. >> > > We already have a couple of bugs reported in that area. You probably hit > one of them: > https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2500 > https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2573 > > >> The unfortunate: >> The installer does not see existing 64 bit java installs under the >> Vista OS. The option to install java only installs the 32 bit java. >> This works and allows the install to complete but now you have both >> 32/64 bit jre's. >> > > OK - see previous mail. > > > >> The messy workaround: >> After the node is installed and working, shut it down. >> Uninstall the 32 bit java. >> Start-run-cmd, then cd to %windir%\syswow64. >> There create three symbolic links to the 64 bit java in >> %windir%\system32. >> mklink java.exe ..\system32\java.exe >> mklink javaw.exe ..\system32\javaw.exe >> mklinik javaws.exe ..\system32\javaws.exe >> Restart the node. >> (I believe these links will break if java is ever updated and need >> to be recreated manually at that point in time.) >> >> >> Thoughts: >> The installer cannot be spoofed by the symbolic links alone, only >> after a completed install is done can the freenet software be ran >> under a 64 bit java. >> >> Could the installer be revised to detect a 64 bit OS? Also >> adjusting for 64 bit java detection and it's possible download >> accordingly? >> >> The options to make changes to the wrapper don't happen when using >> the wizard. Can this be fixed or should it be removed and then >> after the node is up remind the user to adjust memory usage if >> he/she wants and then to reboot the node. >> > > As previously mentioned: Does anyone know how to handle this 32-bit vs. > 64-bit stuff? What to do? (I have no idea, and nothing to test 64-bit > stuff on). > > - Zero3 > ___ > Devl mailing list > Devl@freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > OK, I _know_ I'm gonna say something stupid but I have to, so here it goes: Joe Cynical suggests: the average user probably wouldnt be bothered by having both a 32-bit and a 64-bit JRE's, especially if told that he's supposed to. Make "simple install" just install JRE automatically and "expert mode" let the user manually give the path to his JRE. ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > >> As previously mentioned: Does anyone know how to handle this 32- >> bit vs. >> 64-bit stuff? What to do? (I have no idea, and nothing to test 64- >> bit >> stuff on). >> >> - Zero3 >> ___ >> Devl mailing list >> Devl@freenetproject.org >> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > The wrapper did not like my soft links. Seems that the community > version only supports 32 bit. I'm still playing, but it looks like > I'd have to keep the 32 bit java for freenet if I want to use the > wrapper. (Unless I want to buy my own copy for $90 and up per node.) That is correct, unfortunately. Question is: Can we combine 64-bit Java with 32-bit wrapper and Freenet? - Zero3 ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > >As previously mentioned: Does anyone know how to handle this 32- >bit vs. >64-bit stuff? What to do? (I have no idea, and nothing to test 64- >bit >stuff on). > >- Zero3 >___ >Devl mailing list >Devl@freenetproject.org >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl The wrapper did not like my soft links. Seems that the community version only supports 32 bit. I'm still playing, but it looks like I'd have to keep the 32 bit java for freenet if I want to use the wrapper. (Unless I want to buy my own copy for $90 and up per node.) And in hindsight, the rest of the users on the box don't seem to see the 32 bit java. Only freenet. That might just be a good thing. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Charset: UTF8 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 3.0 wkYEARECAAYFAkoEh64ACgkQDAg0OvA3V4AcxgCfTar8bIgNiUa3ufLsx7xczfQXGCcA nAjDmxZgq8T/S7MB1TQFUJROd/OY =lVbB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Click to learn about options trading and get the latest information. http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/BLSrjkqecvfWeCro7Tz7yWRGp9FlqSlickuUenj9CkMNm747XpuW77f38Wk/ ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On Fri, 08 May 2009 05:51:58 -0600 Zero3 > wrote: >> Hey >> >> You seem to have tested the *old* Windows installer, which >> unfortunately >> doesn't work on Vista. If you can, please test the new one from >> the link >>from toad's mail :). >> - Zero3 > > > The good: > Under Vista64 the installer does produce a functioning node. Great! What about the problems you mentioned in your previous mail? (I just replied to those in another message) > > The bad: > Wrapper.conf seems to not get an update from wizard mode. Maximum > memory was still default of 192 and not the 512 I had set. If I do > a new install and configure it manually rather than using the > wizard, after a node reboot I can see the changes. A reboot after > the wizard install does not. We already have a couple of bugs reported in that area. You probably hit one of them: https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2500 https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2573 > > The unfortunate: > The installer does not see existing 64 bit java installs under the > Vista OS. The option to install java only installs the 32 bit java. > This works and allows the install to complete but now you have both > 32/64 bit jre's. OK - see previous mail. > The messy workaround: > After the node is installed and working, shut it down. > Uninstall the 32 bit java. > Start-run-cmd, then cd to %windir%\syswow64. > There create three symbolic links to the 64 bit java in > %windir%\system32. > mklink java.exe ..\system32\java.exe > mklink javaw.exe ..\system32\javaw.exe > mklinik javaws.exe ..\system32\javaws.exe > Restart the node. > (I believe these links will break if java is ever updated and need > to be recreated manually at that point in time.) > > > Thoughts: > The installer cannot be spoofed by the symbolic links alone, only > after a completed install is done can the freenet software be ran > under a 64 bit java. > > Could the installer be revised to detect a 64 bit OS? Also > adjusting for 64 bit java detection and it's possible download > accordingly? > > The options to make changes to the wrapper don't happen when using > the wizard. Can this be fixed or should it be removed and then > after the node is up remind the user to adjust memory usage if > he/she wants and then to reboot the node. As previously mentioned: Does anyone know how to handle this 32-bit vs. 64-bit stuff? What to do? (I have no idea, and nothing to test 64-bit stuff on). - Zero3 ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Both installers were from toad's links yesterday. One earlier in > the day and the second around four hours later (with a slightly > different file size). Here is the MD5 generated on both files. > a8f88c158cc3927cdc786b67150b86f9 and > 4fb8e9ff969d7c2b0575aa370874cf89. > > I'm more than happy to give it another go or two or three. Once > I've had a bit more coffee... > > Thanks Ahh, you posted logs from the old and new installer. I only noticed the ones from the old installer when i read your message. Old installer: The Java installer with all the different pages. New installer: Only a single page (should look like this: http://privat.zero3.dk/FreenetInstaller_MainGUI.png (old screenshot, but you get the idea)). You should only test the *new* one. I'll try commenting on your results for the new installer: "2. Installer does not see java as installed." Did you already have Java installed at this point? If so, which version? And what is the values of the registry keys "CurrentVersion" and "RuntimeLib" under "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\JavaSoft\Java Runtime Environment"? "5. Does not like my existing node, so much for seeing if I could upgrading in place. :) " As the new installer is fundamentally different from the old one, it won't be possible to upgrade your installation via the installer. Simply keeping identity/settings/datastore/etc. have been discussed, but so far postponed for a later version (a quite complicated process compared to how few users that will actually use it). But in the ideal world, it would indeed be possible :). "7. Fails to start system service as above, again." Which kind of error do you get? "Spoke too soon, the java installed via the Freenet installer installs 32 bit java in %windir%\syswow64 as well as "Program Files (x86)\Java\jre6\bin"." That is true. The installer will always install the 32-bit version if Java is not found. I don't actually know if we ought to install the 32-bit version or 64-bit version? The wrapper (and Freenet?) is 32-bit, but maybe the 64-bit version of Java can run it anyway? Or? Anyone? "Better way would be for the installer to see the existing 64 bit java me thinks." Exactly! If 64-bit Java runs Freenet, I just need to figure out how to detect the 64-bit version (see my questions about registry keys above). Thanks for your help so far btw.! - Zero3 ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 08 May 2009 05:51:58 -0600 Zero3 wrote: >Hey > >You seem to have tested the *old* Windows installer, which >unfortunately >doesn't work on Vista. If you can, please test the new one from >the link >from toad's mail :). > >- Zero3 The good: Under Vista64 the installer does produce a functioning node. The bad: Wrapper.conf seems to not get an update from wizard mode. Maximum memory was still default of 192 and not the 512 I had set. If I do a new install and configure it manually rather than using the wizard, after a node reboot I can see the changes. A reboot after the wizard install does not. The unfortunate: The installer does not see existing 64 bit java installs under the Vista OS. The option to install java only installs the 32 bit java. This works and allows the install to complete but now you have both 32/64 bit jre's. The messy workaround: After the node is installed and working, shut it down. Uninstall the 32 bit java. Start-run-cmd, then cd to %windir%\syswow64. There create three symbolic links to the 64 bit java in %windir%\system32. mklink java.exe ..\system32\java.exe mklink javaw.exe ..\system32\javaw.exe mklinik javaws.exe ..\system32\javaws.exe Restart the node. (I believe these links will break if java is ever updated and need to be recreated manually at that point in time.) Thoughts: The installer cannot be spoofed by the symbolic links alone, only after a completed install is done can the freenet software be ran under a 64 bit java. Could the installer be revised to detect a 64 bit OS? Also adjusting for 64 bit java detection and it's possible download accordingly? The options to make changes to the wrapper don't happen when using the wizard. Can this be fixed or should it be removed and then after the node is up remind the user to adjust memory usage if he/she wants and then to reboot the node. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Charset: UTF8 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 3.0 wkYEARECAAYFAkoEdtIACgkQDAg0OvA3V4C0RQCgq6U0+g9qAPyp6rSo65kAB61OxxQA n2oUjbguM/91Bphs8q1+xida9mPt =WPXP -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Get information on currency trading. Start learning today! http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/BLSrjkqeb0lZtuaUhPIifmeO7WiGIZQDPlGIpRCi4JqbfhGRtPNYbmhEEUo/ ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Both installers were from toad's links yesterday. One earlier in the day and the second around four hours later (with a slightly different file size). Here is the MD5 generated on both files. a8f88c158cc3927cdc786b67150b86f9 and 4fb8e9ff969d7c2b0575aa370874cf89. I'm more than happy to give it another go or two or three. Once I've had a bit more coffee... Thanks On Fri, 08 May 2009 05:51:58 -0600 Zero3 wrote: >Hey > >You seem to have tested the *old* Windows installer, which >unfortunately >doesn't work on Vista. If you can, please test the new one from >the link >from toad's mail :). > >- Zero3 > >gh...@hushmail.com skrev: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> >> On Thu, 07 May 2009 16:29:19 -0600 Matthew Toseland >> wrote: >>> On Thursday 07 May 2009 23:27:44 Matthew Toseland wrote: On Thursday 07 May 2009 18:10:06 Matthew Toseland wrote: >>> >https://checksums.freenetproject.org/latest/FreenetInstaller.exe > This should be Vista-compatible. It is entirely Zero3's work. >>> Please test >>> it > before we release it to all Windows users! In particular, >>> testing on Vista > and Windows 7 would be very helpful (since the existing >>> installer doesn't > work on these platforms). Thanks! > I have updated the executable: - Bundled update.cmd, with juiceman's patch applied. - Various minor fixes. >>> The new length is 8849746 bytes. >> >> Here is my adventure with trying to install Freenet on Vista 64 >bit >> (I'm new to this OS). It is a bit repetitive but better than >> nothing I imagine. >> >> >> >> Notes and such: >> >> Installing as an administrator. >> >> Idea: Progress indicator for both freenet-stable-latest.jar and >> freenet-ext.jar inside IzPack. They took quite some time to >> download this iteration and a new user may give up. If not a >> progress indicator, possibly an idea of how large the file is so >> the user knows it may be awhile. >> >> Failure same as reported to bugtracker... >> >> Registering .fref file extension >> "Online installation mode" >> Downloading update.cmd >> Downloading the Opennet seednode file >> Setting up plugins >> -JSTUN >> -UPnP >> -XMLLibrarian >> -KeyExplorer >> -ThawIndexBrowser >> Downloading freenet-stable-latest.jar >> Downloading freenet-ext.jar >> Detecting tcp port availability >> Setting fproxy port to >> Building wrapper.conf >> Copying install_service.bat >> Copying remove_service.bat >> Copying start.cmd >> Copying stop.cmd >> Installing the wrapper >> - Creating a user for freenet >> Removing old freenet user >> Creating new freenet user >> Setting password expiry >> Writing password to file temporarily to install service >> - Hiding the freenet user from the login screen >> - Tweaking the permissions of the freenet user >> - Changing file permissions >> - Registering Freenet as a system service >> Running wrapper on wrapper.conf >> Running wrapper again on wrapper.conf >> wrapper | Freenet 0.7 darknet- installed. >> - Start the node up >> The Freenet 0.7 darknet- service is starting. >> The Freenet 0.7 darknet- service could not be started. >> >> A system error has occurred. >> >> System error 1067 has occurred. >> >> The process terminated unexpectedly. >> >> Starting browser >> All done, please click Next >> - - >> >> Possible windows defender issue? Trying again with it disabled. >> - - >> >> Strange, 2nd time it thinks I do not have java installed. To >work >> around I ran java.exe from the command line and then immediately >> ran the >> >> installer. This only worked once and only once, see further >down. >> >> Another thought: In addition to "Online installation mode", how >> about a mode for moving a pre-existing node to an new (virgin) >> windows OS. (creates new user, permission, etc, but moves >existing >> configs and datastore) >> >> Pffft, failed again as above >> >> ahh, mklink java.exe c:\windows\system32\java.exe >> >> Ok, try again: >> >> 1. Install as administrator >> 2. after IzPack pack install finishes (13/13) drop to cmd as >admin >> and add symbolic link in ./bin "mklink java.exe >> c:\windows\system32\java.exe" >> 3. Click next in installer. >> 4. Installer finished w/o errors, click next. >> 5. Oops, next window is empty, clicking next does nothing. >> 6. Click Quit. (No shortcuts/start menu items built for Freenet) >> 7. Freenet first time wizard starts >> 8. Work through installer, then I shut down node from main page. >> >> Try again: >> 1. Install as administrator >> 2. Installer does not see java as installed. >> 3. Run the java installer, New window on installer with options >for >> shortcuts etc. (not seen in earlier tries, progress?) >> 4. Change default directory >> 5. Does not like my existing node, so much for s
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
Hey You seem to have tested the *old* Windows installer, which unfortunately doesn't work on Vista. If you can, please test the new one from the link from toad's mail :). - Zero3 gh...@hushmail.com skrev: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On Thu, 07 May 2009 16:29:19 -0600 Matthew Toseland > wrote: >> On Thursday 07 May 2009 23:27:44 Matthew Toseland wrote: >>> On Thursday 07 May 2009 18:10:06 Matthew Toseland wrote: >> https://checksums.freenetproject.org/latest/FreenetInstaller.exe This should be Vista-compatible. It is entirely Zero3's work. >> Please test >> it before we release it to all Windows users! In particular, >> testing on Vista and Windows 7 would be very helpful (since the existing >> installer doesn't work on these platforms). Thanks! >>> I have updated the executable: >>> - Bundled update.cmd, with juiceman's patch applied. >>> - Various minor fixes. >> The new length is 8849746 bytes. > > Here is my adventure with trying to install Freenet on Vista 64 bit > (I'm new to this OS). It is a bit repetitive but better than > nothing I imagine. > > > > Notes and such: > > Installing as an administrator. > > Idea: Progress indicator for both freenet-stable-latest.jar and > freenet-ext.jar inside IzPack. They took quite some time to > download this iteration and a new user may give up. If not a > progress indicator, possibly an idea of how large the file is so > the user knows it may be awhile. > > Failure same as reported to bugtracker... > > Registering .fref file extension > "Online installation mode" > Downloading update.cmd > Downloading the Opennet seednode file > Setting up plugins > -JSTUN > -UPnP > -XMLLibrarian > -KeyExplorer > -ThawIndexBrowser > Downloading freenet-stable-latest.jar > Downloading freenet-ext.jar > Detecting tcp port availability > Setting fproxy port to > Building wrapper.conf > Copying install_service.bat > Copying remove_service.bat > Copying start.cmd > Copying stop.cmd > Installing the wrapper > - Creating a user for freenet > Removing old freenet user > Creating new freenet user > Setting password expiry > Writing password to file temporarily to install service > - Hiding the freenet user from the login screen > - Tweaking the permissions of the freenet user > - Changing file permissions > - Registering Freenet as a system service > Running wrapper on wrapper.conf > Running wrapper again on wrapper.conf > wrapper | Freenet 0.7 darknet- installed. > - Start the node up > The Freenet 0.7 darknet- service is starting. > The Freenet 0.7 darknet- service could not be started. > > A system error has occurred. > > System error 1067 has occurred. > > The process terminated unexpectedly. > > Starting browser > All done, please click Next > - - > > Possible windows defender issue? Trying again with it disabled. > - - > > Strange, 2nd time it thinks I do not have java installed. To work > around I ran java.exe from the command line and then immediately > ran the > > installer. This only worked once and only once, see further down. > > Another thought: In addition to "Online installation mode", how > about a mode for moving a pre-existing node to an new (virgin) > windows OS. (creates new user, permission, etc, but moves existing > configs and datastore) > > Pffft, failed again as above > > ahh, mklink java.exe c:\windows\system32\java.exe > > Ok, try again: > > 1. Install as administrator > 2. after IzPack pack install finishes (13/13) drop to cmd as admin > and add symbolic link in ./bin "mklink java.exe > c:\windows\system32\java.exe" > 3. Click next in installer. > 4. Installer finished w/o errors, click next. > 5. Oops, next window is empty, clicking next does nothing. > 6. Click Quit. (No shortcuts/start menu items built for Freenet) > 7. Freenet first time wizard starts > 8. Work through installer, then I shut down node from main page. > > Try again: > 1. Install as administrator > 2. Installer does not see java as installed. > 3. Run the java installer, New window on installer with options for > shortcuts etc. (not seen in earlier tries, progress?) > 4. Change default directory > 5. Does not like my existing node, so much for seeing if I could > upgrading in place. :) > 6. Point to empty directory. > 7. Fails to start system service as above, again. > > Try again: > 1. Uninstall java(s) and now uninstall Freenet as it now had menus > and such. This works! lol > 2. Install as administrator > 3. Install java. WTF? current user no longer sees java. Perhaps > only for freenet? Continue install... > 4. Install says it finished > 5. First time installer starts > 6. Finished and working had I any 'friends' yet. > > Spoke too soon, the java installed via the Freenet installer > installs 32 bi
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
Matthew Toseland wrote: On Thursday 07 May 2009 23:27:44 Matthew Toseland wrote: On Thursday 07 May 2009 18:10:06 Matthew Toseland wrote: https://checksums.freenetproject.org/latest/FreenetInstaller.exe This should be Vista-compatible. It is entirely Zero3's work. Please test it before we release it to all Windows users! In particular, testing on Vista and Windows 7 would be very helpful (since the existing installer doesn't work on these platforms). Thanks! I have updated the executable: - Bundled update.cmd, with juiceman's patch applied. - Various minor fixes. The new length is 8849746 bytes. ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl I checked the new installer on Windows Vista 64bit. Looks good :) no problems. Install was done very fast. very nice. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 07 May 2009 16:29:19 -0600 Matthew Toseland wrote: >On Thursday 07 May 2009 23:27:44 Matthew Toseland wrote: >> On Thursday 07 May 2009 18:10:06 Matthew Toseland wrote: >> > >https://checksums.freenetproject.org/latest/FreenetInstaller.exe >> > >> > This should be Vista-compatible. It is entirely Zero3's work. >Please test >it >> > before we release it to all Windows users! In particular, >testing on Vista >> > and Windows 7 would be very helpful (since the existing >installer doesn't >> > work on these platforms). Thanks! >> > >> I have updated the executable: >> - Bundled update.cmd, with juiceman's patch applied. >> - Various minor fixes. > >The new length is 8849746 bytes. Here is my adventure with trying to install Freenet on Vista 64 bit (I'm new to this OS). It is a bit repetitive but better than nothing I imagine. Notes and such: Installing as an administrator. Idea: Progress indicator for both freenet-stable-latest.jar and freenet-ext.jar inside IzPack. They took quite some time to download this iteration and a new user may give up. If not a progress indicator, possibly an idea of how large the file is so the user knows it may be awhile. Failure same as reported to bugtracker... Registering .fref file extension "Online installation mode" Downloading update.cmd Downloading the Opennet seednode file Setting up plugins -JSTUN -UPnP -XMLLibrarian -KeyExplorer -ThawIndexBrowser Downloading freenet-stable-latest.jar Downloading freenet-ext.jar Detecting tcp port availability Setting fproxy port to Building wrapper.conf Copying install_service.bat Copying remove_service.bat Copying start.cmd Copying stop.cmd Installing the wrapper - Creating a user for freenet Removing old freenet user Creating new freenet user Setting password expiry Writing password to file temporarily to install service - Hiding the freenet user from the login screen - Tweaking the permissions of the freenet user - Changing file permissions - Registering Freenet as a system service Running wrapper on wrapper.conf Running wrapper again on wrapper.conf wrapper | Freenet 0.7 darknet- installed. - Start the node up The Freenet 0.7 darknet- service is starting. The Freenet 0.7 darknet- service could not be started. A system error has occurred. System error 1067 has occurred. The process terminated unexpectedly. Starting browser All done, please click Next - - Possible windows defender issue? Trying again with it disabled. - - Strange, 2nd time it thinks I do not have java installed. To work around I ran java.exe from the command line and then immediately ran the installer. This only worked once and only once, see further down. Another thought: In addition to "Online installation mode", how about a mode for moving a pre-existing node to an new (virgin) windows OS. (creates new user, permission, etc, but moves existing configs and datastore) Pffft, failed again as above ahh, mklink java.exe c:\windows\system32\java.exe Ok, try again: 1. Install as administrator 2. after IzPack pack install finishes (13/13) drop to cmd as admin and add symbolic link in ./bin "mklink java.exe c:\windows\system32\java.exe" 3. Click next in installer. 4. Installer finished w/o errors, click next. 5. Oops, next window is empty, clicking next does nothing. 6. Click Quit. (No shortcuts/start menu items built for Freenet) 7. Freenet first time wizard starts 8. Work through installer, then I shut down node from main page. Try again: 1. Install as administrator 2. Installer does not see java as installed. 3. Run the java installer, New window on installer with options for shortcuts etc. (not seen in earlier tries, progress?) 4. Change default directory 5. Does not like my existing node, so much for seeing if I could upgrading in place. :) 6. Point to empty directory. 7. Fails to start system service as above, again. Try again: 1. Uninstall java(s) and now uninstall Freenet as it now had menus and such. This works! lol 2. Install as administrator 3. Install java. WTF? current user no longer sees java. Perhaps only for freenet? Continue install... 4. Install says it finished 5. First time installer starts 6. Finished and working had I any 'friends' yet. Spoke too soon, the java installed via the Freenet installer installs 32 bit java in %windir%\syswow64 as well as "Program Files (x86)\Java\jre6\bin". Try yet again: 1. install 64 bit java 2. ln them (mklink java.exe ..\system32\java.exe) 3. Install freenet as administrator 4. Again, fails to see java. 5. Ok, gonna try installing java from freenet installer, then remove this version of java after install. 6. fails to seee java, but wait, trying #2 again after install... 7. hmm, it tried to start, but says freen
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
On Thursday 07 May 2009 23:27:44 Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Thursday 07 May 2009 18:10:06 Matthew Toseland wrote: > > https://checksums.freenetproject.org/latest/FreenetInstaller.exe > > > > This should be Vista-compatible. It is entirely Zero3's work. Please test it > > before we release it to all Windows users! In particular, testing on Vista > > and Windows 7 would be very helpful (since the existing installer doesn't > > work on these platforms). Thanks! > > > I have updated the executable: > - Bundled update.cmd, with juiceman's patch applied. > - Various minor fixes. The new length is 8849746 bytes. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Re: [freenet-dev] Please help us test the new wininstaller (Vista users especially welcome)
On Thursday 07 May 2009 18:10:06 Matthew Toseland wrote: > https://checksums.freenetproject.org/latest/FreenetInstaller.exe > > This should be Vista-compatible. It is entirely Zero3's work. Please test it > before we release it to all Windows users! In particular, testing on Vista > and Windows 7 would be very helpful (since the existing installer doesn't > work on these platforms). Thanks! > I have updated the executable: - Bundled update.cmd, with juiceman's patch applied. - Various minor fixes. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
