On Monday 24 August 2009 17:00:01 Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Monday 24 August 2009 16:39:43 Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > On Monday 24 August 2009 10:03:14 Daniel Cheng wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 6:22 AM, Matthew
> > > Toseland<[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On Friday 21 August 2009 22:04:07 Masayuki Hatta wrote:
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> >>>>> In <[email protected]>
> > > >> >>>>> Matthew Toseland <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > How common is 64-bit Vista? Currently we install a 32-bit JVM, which
> > > >> > works, but doesn't get auto-updated, and is somewhat slower than if
> > > >> > we'd installed a 64-bit one (assuming we fix the FEC libraries and
> > > >> > manage to build them for Windows). We can't install a 64-bit JVM,
> > > >> > because the free version of the Java Service Wrapper (which we use
> > > >> > for self-restarting the node when deploying updates, and for
> > > >> > detecting hangs) only supports 32-bit.
> > > >>
> > > >> > Options?
> > > >>
> > > >> Possibly YAJSW (http://yajsw.sourceforge.net/) is worth trying.  Seems
> > > >> it supports Win32/64 (including not only Vista but also the
> > > >> forthcoming Win7) and GNU/Linux 32/64, Mac OS X, FreeBSD, Solaris too.
> > > >> LGPL'd.
> > > >
> > > > Ooooh, that looks very promising yeah.
> > > >
> > > > http://yajsw.sourceforge.net/Migrating from JSW.html
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure about "Simple Configuration", would need to look into that 
> > > > as we require multiple jars; we can add stuff to the classpath so I 
> > > > don't think it's an issue. The migration methods look easy enough. Of 
> > > > course this would complicate support slightly, and we'd have to decide 
> > > > whether to migrate old installations (IMHO probably not a good idea).
> > > >>
> > > >> Best regards,
> > > >> MH
> > > >
> > > 
> > > http://yajsw.sourceforge.net/Migrating%20from%20JSW.html#mozTocId371344
> > > >> ... the minimal virtual memory requirement of YAJSW is  90 MB and 40 
> > > >> MB physical memory.
> > > >> The value varies depending on the OS and the functions....
> > > 
> > > 40MB for a wrapper is alot.
> > 
> > Eeek! How much is that reduced by JVM memory sharing between the wrapper 
> > and the client process?
> > 
> If the answer is "not much", we should consider just using a batch file to 
> restart Freenet, and give up on hang detection, on 64-bit windows???
> 
> Or maybe it's possible to compile a 64-bit version of JSW from the provided 
> source?
> 
Do we need a solution for win64 other than installing a 32-bit JVM before 0.8?

The main problem with installing a 32-bit JVM is that
1) It is not updated by the java auto-updater, and
2) If we tell the user that they need a newer JVM, they will probably go and 
download the 64-bit version.

We can solve the latter by clarifying the error message - but only if we can 
detect 32-on-64 from Java. Can we?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to