OK, I've finally come up with a deduping script. It's not perfect, in that I
didn't know what to do with duplicate nodes with the same version, so I just
left them alone, but it's a start. Hopefully, over time, it'll work out OK,
the idea being that as later versions of nodes are added, the
D'oh! That's what I get for coding into the wee hours of the morning on too
much coffee and not enough food. :-)
I've attached corrections to the addnodes.sh and dedupe.sh scripts. It
occurred to me later that if addnodes.sh is run periodically without *really*
eliminating duplicate noderefs
One more correction to addnodes.sh:
Rather than copying noderefs.txt to the end of seednodes.ref before deduping
seednodes.ref, put it at the beginning. This way the (presumably) newer nodes
from the freshly fetched noderefs.txt are guaranteed to win out over any older
ones in seednodes.ref.
While going back to correct the problem of seednodes.ref being backed up in
both addnodes.sh and dedupe.sh (which would cause the final backed up
seednodes.ref.bak to actually be a copy of the raw concatenated noderefs.txt
and seednodes.ref), I refined these two scripts even further and added a
Hi Toad,
on Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:37:46 + you wrote:
Before i start i must say i always like the idea of freenet. I tried
it a couple time long ago but i never had enouth disk space to devote.
I tried the current stable yesterday and i must say i was disapointed.
First, like many here, by the
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 07:19:28PM +0100, Alban Bedel wrote:
Hi Toad,
on Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:37:46 + you wrote:
Before i start i must say i always like the idea of freenet. I tried
it a couple time long ago but i never had enouth disk space to devote.
I tried the current stable
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 06:56:42AM -0600, S wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:33:42 +0100
Maximilian Mehnert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Freenet is one of the most beautiful ideas I ever hit on.
But it should be possible to run it on a small pentium machine with no
more than 100MB of RAM.
I
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 10:13:05AM +0100, Maximilian Mehnert wrote:
Am Mi, den 28.01.2004 schrieb Maximilian Mehnert um 15:28:
Having 400MB of RAM used by the node's java processes seems out of whack.
In fact that sounds insane. Which threadFactory is your configuration
file set to use?
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 09:28:27PM +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
On 29/01/2004, at 10:13 PM, Maximilian Mehnert wrote:
Am Mi, den 28.01.2004 schrieb Maximilian Mehnert um 15:28:
Having 400MB of RAM used by the node's java processes seems out of
whack.
In fact that sounds insane. Which
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 01:21:13PM +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
And how many browsers do that? Sure, I'm not sure about writing a
plugin, since most of the time they can only add processing for
different MIME types, whereas a different browser using a freenet://
protocol could connect
Please read my other mail on this subject before passing judgement -
what I am working on at the moment may actually have some bearing on
this.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 12:15:22AM +, Toad wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 07:19:28PM +0100, Alban Bedel wrote:
Hi Toad,
on Mon, 16 Feb 2004
Toad schrieb:
Upgrade it to 256MB. Your motherboard doesn't support 256MB? That sounds
unlikely if it can take a celeron 400. If you are so poor that you can't
afford the $50 upgrade, well frankly, can you afford the bandwidth?
Well there are Countrys where bandwidth is very cheap or free for
Came home tonight to find that my node had crashed earlier on. Now after
restarting I'm seeing millions (literally) of this message in the logfile:
18-Feb-2004 01:44:20 (freenet.ConnectionHandler, YThread-106, ERROR): Caught
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Should be mux protocol, was
[EMAIL
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 02:04:45AM -, Kevin Bennett wrote:
Came home tonight to find that my node had crashed earlier on. Now after
restarting I'm seeing millions (literally) of this message in the logfile:
This definitely should not happen, it means your node is using the
pre-multiplexing
14 matches
Mail list logo
