On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 10:26:55PM +0300, Jusa Saari wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:53:35 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:32:52PM +0300, Jusa Saari wrote: > >> On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:15:54 +0200, Jerome Flesch wrote: > >> > >> >> Finally, why does FUQID need replacing ? I thought it was working > >> >> just fine, even on Freenet 0.7 ? > >> >> > >> > It works only under Windows. And no, Wine is *not* a solution, because > >> > it works only on Linux 32bits, and so Mac OS[X] users and Linux 64bits > >> > users (amd64) can't use Fuqid. > >> > >> I was under the impression that Freenet itself doesn't works so well > >> under 64-bit Linux, since that doesn't support non-native Posix threads, > >> leading to a deadlock. > > > > Purely a temporary problem, and in any case as long as the wrapper works > > Actually, if this problem is indeed caused by interaction between Java and > NPTL, it has been around for years and shows no signs of going away. From > what I've understood, the problem is caused by a bug in NPTL, and until > that is fixed or JVM is rewritten to work around it, the problem persists.
Well... yeah. Modulo GCJ. > > > (does it?), the node will be auto-restarted when it hangs. This is why we > > have disabled the LD_ASSUME_KERNEL hack on new installs; it's not > > necessary as long as the wrapper and the watchdog work. > > What happens if the watchdog gets stuck too ? It has to synchronize with > the watched thread sometimes to do its work, AFAIK. It just reads a variable. An int. Without synchronization. > > Besides, when the node gets restarted, all pending requests are lost, > aren't they ? That means that constant rebstarts can't be good for network > health. They are likely to break at least some client applications, too. True, but as long as it's relatively rare that's ok. > > Is there any specific penaly for using non-native Posix threads ? I was > under the impression that the major advantage to NPTL was thread creation > speed, and Freenet doesn't constantly create new threads, or does it ? They're scheduled as one process, so we can use thread priorities... we do create lots of new threads, but I dunno, they seem faster. > > >> Besides, can't 64-bit Linux run 32-bit programs, if the correct > >> libraries are installed ? > > > > That's an awful lot of work for the user... > > I'm pretty certain that most 64-bit distros have 32-bit libraries > installed by default, since to do otherwise would make them completely > unable to use any program for which source code is not available, or whose > author made unwarranted assumptions about pointer size. Well sure but 32-bit wine? -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
