[freenet-support] Some thoughts and suggestions
On Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:32:07 +0100, Repu Blica wrote: > Yes this may go against the great Ivory Tower principle of utter > Tolerance and Free Speech. The Tower may not be as straight and > pretty anymore but it is still standing. Compare it to the > alternative that provoked users topple the Tower and crush it to tiny > pieces. All information must be roughly classified. Classes of > information likely to be offensive must not be activated by default. I for one proudly support "the great Ivory Tower principle of utter Tolerance and Free Speech". It's not my problem that some information offends you. Moreover, as Toad already mentioned, there are plenty of places on freenet that already classify and censor their content. Your suggestion that "ALL information MUST be roughly classified" is naive and impossible. It's pretty much the same thing as saying "ALL bad things MUST be controlled and eliminated". Unfortunately, even if it were logistically possible, your conception of what is good and bad obviously will not correlate with your neighbour's--and definitely not with mine. All you actually want is more people that think like you to join freenet (and self-filter yourselves in your own sheltered community)--and I'm all for that :)--the more the merrier (though I don't agree with your thinking). And this (web-of-trust) already has been implemented for newsgroups, and will soon expand to cover a broader range of content.
[freenet-support] Bug?
Mel Charters wrote: >> Content-Type: multipart/signed; >> boundary="nextPart1983121.TrFsbus4oi"; >> protocol="application/pgp-signature"; >> micalg=pgp-sha1 >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> >> On Tuesday 09 December 2008 10:43, Volodya wrote: >> >>> Matthew Toseland wrote: >>> > On Sunday 07 December 2008 14:57, Volodya wrote: >>> >> Mel Charters wrote: >>> >>> Probably a bug: please report: 6 peers forcibly disconnected due to not >>> >>> acknowledging packets. >>> >>> 6 of your peers are having severe problems (not acknowledging packets >>> >>> even after 10 minutes). This is probably due to a bug in the code. >>> >>> Please report it to us at the bug tracker at >>> >>> https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ or to the support mailing list >>> >>> support at freenetproject.org. Please include this message and what >>> version >>> >>> of the node you are running. The affected peers (you may not want to >>> >>> include this in your bug report if they are darknet peers) are: >>> >>> >>> >>> * 80.67.126.33:48685 >>> >>> * 91.114.90.176:50370 >>> >>> * 70.252.130.137:62819 >>> >>> * 74.192.11.111:1030 >>> >>> * 68.164.92.215:5510 >>> >>> * 88.115.66.96:8421 >>> >>> >>> >>> Freenet 0.7 Build #1191 r24115M >>> >>> Freenet-ext Build #26 r23771 >>> >>> >>> >>> May be from #1190. Build #1191 appeared within the last 10 hours. >>> >> > >>> -- >> >>> >>> Mel Charters >>> >> Have you restarted your node since Saturday at midnight? >>> > >>> > Unfortunately that's now Tuesday... >>> >>> I just got the same thing. I repeat, the bug is still there (although not >>> as >>> dominant as before). >>> >> "Just" ? Did you or did you not restart your node after midnight GMT on >> Tuesday? >> >> > The bug is still there and I restarted at 12:15 GMT Tuesday morning. Details: > Probably a bug: please report: 6 peers forcibly disconnected due to > not acknowledging packets. > 6 of your peers are having severe problems (not acknowledging packets > even after 10 minutes). This is probably due to a bug in the code. > Please report it to us at the bug tracker at > https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ or to the support mailing list > support at freenetproject.org. Please include this message and what > version of the node you are running. The affected peers (you may not > want to include this in your bug report if they are darknet peers) > are: > > * 87.96.165.16:12938 > * 211.31.2.118:32782 > * 83.99.52.101:2587 > * 88.175.188.50:10394 > * 211.31.2.118:32768 > * 92.132.225.163:38644 > > Freenet 0.7 Build #1191 r24115M > Freenet-ext Build #26 r23771 > > This one is still seen in build 1192, although it seems to appear less often (had sometimes around 12 forcibly disconnected with build 1190). Freenet 0.7 Build #1192 r24161M Freenet-ext Build #26 r23771 Stacktrace for one of the latest: at freenet.node.PeerNode.disconnected(PeerNode.java:1139) at freenet.node.PeerNode.onRemove(PeerNode.java:3554) at freenet.node.OpennetPeerNode.onRemove(OpennetPeerNode.java:66) at freenet.node.PeerManager.removePeer(PeerManager.java:338) at freenet.node.PeerManager.disconnect(PeerManager.java:523) at freenet.node.OpennetManager.wantPeer(OpennetManager.java:377) at freenet.node.OpennetManager.addNewOpennetNode(OpennetManager.java:249) at freenet.node.Node.addNewOpennetNode(Node.java:3662) at freenet.node.RequestSender.finishOpennet(RequestSender.java:1135) at freenet.node.RequestSender.finish(RequestSender.java:1082) at freenet.node.RequestSender.realRun(RequestSender.java:785) at freenet.node.RequestSender.run(RequestSender.java:169) at freenet.support.PooledExecutor$MyThread.run(PooledExecutor.java:190) Greetz, AncoL
Re: [freenet-support] Some thoughts and suggestions
On Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:32:07 +0100, Repu Blica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes this may go against the great Ivory Tower principle of utter > Tolerance and Free Speech. The Tower may not be as straight and > pretty anymore but it is still standing. Compare it to the > alternative that provoked users topple the Tower and crush it to tiny > pieces. All information must be roughly classified. Classes of > information likely to be offensive must not be activated by default. I for one proudly support "the great Ivory Tower principle of utter Tolerance and Free Speech". It's not my problem that some information offends you. Moreover, as Toad already mentioned, there are plenty of places on freenet that already classify and censor their content. Your suggestion that "ALL information MUST be roughly classified" is naive and impossible. It's pretty much the same thing as saying "ALL bad things MUST be controlled and eliminated". Unfortunately, even if it were logistically possible, your conception of what is good and bad obviously will not correlate with your neighbour's--and definitely not with mine. All you actually want is more people that think like you to join freenet (and self-filter yourselves in your own sheltered community)--and I'm all for that :)--the more the merrier (though I don't agree with your thinking). And this (web-of-trust) already has been implemented for newsgroups, and will soon expand to cover a broader range of content. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Download issues
Victor Denisov wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > 1. Recently I started getting the following errors when downloads were > getting to 100%: > > Temporary files error: File already freed > > Freenet allows to remove or restart the download. If I restart it, it > immediately fails again with the same error. Restarting the client > doesn't seem to help. > > 2. For a couple of weeks at least I'm getting weird downloads behavior > when restarting the node. I have about 1 Gb of downloads queued, with > store size set to 5 Gb (so the cache should be 2.5 Gb). My understanding > was that after restarting the node, downloads would be pseudo-resumed by > trying to pull the blocks from the cache before trying to get the from > the network. However, most downloads on queue loose significant amount > of progress (sometimes dropping from 80% to 3% for a 60 Mb file) after > restarting the node (within more than an hour after restart). > > Running 1192 on Java 1.6.0_06 64-bit, Windows XP x64. > > Regards, > Victor Denisov. > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFJQFgE1O5++4rTuI0RAqWWAKCT/GC6MRbx3YAfViaesBZakhcCxACfQGIx > LeHCLRnEzih7GYlhM1VwQuc= > =Vhon > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > Support mailing list > Support@freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > I've seen exactly the same behavior too. Regards, AncoL ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[freenet-support] Download issues
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 1. Recently I started getting the following errors when downloads were getting to 100%: Temporary files error: File already freed Freenet allows to remove or restart the download. If I restart it, it immediately fails again with the same error. Restarting the client doesn't seem to help. 2. For a couple of weeks at least I'm getting weird downloads behavior when restarting the node. I have about 1 Gb of downloads queued, with store size set to 5 Gb (so the cache should be 2.5 Gb). My understanding was that after restarting the node, downloads would be pseudo-resumed by trying to pull the blocks from the cache before trying to get the from the network. However, most downloads on queue loose significant amount of progress (sometimes dropping from 80% to 3% for a 60 Mb file) after restarting the node (within more than an hour after restart). Running 1192 on Java 1.6.0_06 64-bit, Windows XP x64. Regards, Victor Denisov. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJQFgE1O5++4rTuI0RAqWWAKCT/GC6MRbx3YAfViaesBZakhcCxACfQGIx LeHCLRnEzih7GYlhM1VwQuc= =Vhon -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Bug?
Mel Charters wrote: >> Content-Type: multipart/signed; >> boundary="nextPart1983121.TrFsbus4oi"; >> protocol="application/pgp-signature"; >> micalg=pgp-sha1 >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> >> On Tuesday 09 December 2008 10:43, Volodya wrote: >> >>> Matthew Toseland wrote: >>> > On Sunday 07 December 2008 14:57, Volodya wrote: >>> >> Mel Charters wrote: >>> >>> Probably a bug: please report: 6 peers forcibly disconnected due to not >>> >>> acknowledging packets. >>> >>> 6 of your peers are having severe problems (not acknowledging packets >>> >>> even after 10 minutes). This is probably due to a bug in the code. >>> >>> Please report it to us at the bug tracker at >>> >>> https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ or to the support mailing list >>> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please include this message and what version >>> >>> of the node you are running. The affected peers (you may not want to >>> >>> include this in your bug report if they are darknet peers) are: >>> >>> >>> >>> * 80.67.126.33:48685 >>> >>> * 91.114.90.176:50370 >>> >>> * 70.252.130.137:62819 >>> >>> * 74.192.11.111:1030 >>> >>> * 68.164.92.215:5510 >>> >>> * 88.115.66.96:8421 >>> >>> >>> >>> Freenet 0.7 Build #1191 r24115M >>> >>> Freenet-ext Build #26 r23771 >>> >>> >>> >>> May be from #1190. Build #1191 appeared within the last 10 hours. >>> >> > >>> -- >> >>> >>> Mel Charters >>> >> Have you restarted your node since Saturday at midnight? >>> > >>> > Unfortunately that's now Tuesday... >>> >>> I just got the same thing. I repeat, the bug is still there (although not >>> as >>> dominant as before). >>> >> "Just" ? Did you or did you not restart your node after midnight GMT on >> Tuesday? >> >> > The bug is still there and I restarted at 12:15 GMT Tuesday morning. Details: > Probably a bug: please report: 6 peers forcibly disconnected due to > not acknowledging packets. > 6 of your peers are having severe problems (not acknowledging packets > even after 10 minutes). This is probably due to a bug in the code. > Please report it to us at the bug tracker at > https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ or to the support mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please include this message and what > version of the node you are running. The affected peers (you may not > want to include this in your bug report if they are darknet peers) > are: > > * 87.96.165.16:12938 > * 211.31.2.118:32782 > * 83.99.52.101:2587 > * 88.175.188.50:10394 > * 211.31.2.118:32768 > * 92.132.225.163:38644 > > Freenet 0.7 Build #1191 r24115M > Freenet-ext Build #26 r23771 > > This one is still seen in build 1192, although it seems to appear less often (had sometimes around 12 forcibly disconnected with build 1190). Freenet 0.7 Build #1192 r24161M Freenet-ext Build #26 r23771 Stacktrace for one of the latest: at freenet.node.PeerNode.disconnected(PeerNode.java:1139) at freenet.node.PeerNode.onRemove(PeerNode.java:3554) at freenet.node.OpennetPeerNode.onRemove(OpennetPeerNode.java:66) at freenet.node.PeerManager.removePeer(PeerManager.java:338) at freenet.node.PeerManager.disconnect(PeerManager.java:523) at freenet.node.OpennetManager.wantPeer(OpennetManager.java:377) at freenet.node.OpennetManager.addNewOpennetNode(OpennetManager.java:249) at freenet.node.Node.addNewOpennetNode(Node.java:3662) at freenet.node.RequestSender.finishOpennet(RequestSender.java:1135) at freenet.node.RequestSender.finish(RequestSender.java:1082) at freenet.node.RequestSender.realRun(RequestSender.java:785) at freenet.node.RequestSender.run(RequestSender.java:169) at freenet.support.PooledExecutor$MyThread.run(PooledExecutor.java:190) Greetz, AncoL ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1190, 1191 and 1192
Sorry for the belated changelogs ... Please upgrade! 1190: - 1189 broke seednodes. Fixed in 1190. 1191: - Fix startup failures due to problems with updater temp files. Delete the old temp files. 1192: - Fix a major unfairness bug in the packet sending scheduler code. This may have caused some nodes to be sent far more traffic than others, likely causing various nasty connectivity bugs possibly including the forced disconnect due to not acking packets bug. 1192 is mandatory on Friday. After that it will be interesting to know whether the forced disconnect due to not acknowledging packets bug is still around - it probably will be, but at least we're down one possible cause... :| If you find any bugs, please let us know, preferably via the bug tracker: https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ Thanks for using Freenet, and apologies for the problems we've had lately. Note that we have additional changes in trunk which have not been released yet; all the above are single-bugfix builds. We always need more trunk testers (update.sh/update.cmd testing), but you need to keep up to date; joining the IRC channel is helpful but not essential. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20081210/9c90a41a/attachment.pgp>
