[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
It has no opennet. As far as I'm concerned, it's useless. On 8/23/06, Ortwin Regel wrote: > Wrong, it works quite well so it's functional. It's not completed but it > needs users to progress. > > > On 8/24/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote: > > > 0.7 isn't a stable version either. It's a not

[freenet-support] System error 1067

2006-08-23 Thread simon gallienne
y thanks in advance. - To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060823/f27e3b56/attachment.html>

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
0.7 isn't a stable version either. It's a not nearly completed, far from functional version. On 8/23/06, Ortwin Regel wrote: > 0.5 isn't a stable version. It's an outdated version that many people > happen to use. Of course you can keep using 0.5 and slowly watch it > die, or even try to keep it

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread nob...@dantooine.homelinux.net
This is a Type III anonymous message, sent to you by the Winston Smith Project Dantooine mixminion server at Dantooine.winstonsmith.info. If you do not want to receive anonymous messages, please contact pbox- admin at winstonsmith.info. For more information about anonymity, see

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread Nicholas Sturm
chments/20060823/2710e561/attachment.html>

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread an ominous cow herd
Mine fluctuates between 100 and 200 active connections with 800 known nodes. I have seen people bragging about having several hundred active connections and thousands of known nodes. On Wednesday 23 August 2006 11:19, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote: > My bad. 400 known nodes. Though...I have 50

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 953

2006-08-23 Thread Matthew Toseland
: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060823/47900c06/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread Ian Clarke
t;https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060823/27ed8e94/attachment.html>

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread an ominous cow herd
Thank you for the reply. I was hoping that you might actually answer the other part of the message The past Freenet had two branches, the stable and unstable. ?The unstable branch was the one where active coding was performed. ?The stable branch did not get updated often if at all. My

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread Ortwin Regel
ort-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060823/8bab0cab/attachment.html>

[freenet-support] Caught a FetchException

2006-08-23 Thread freenetw...@web.de
Current svn snapshot: Aug 23, 2006 17:08:08:818 (freenet.client.async.SplitFileFetcherSegment, FCP input handler for /127.0.0.1:2580, ERROR): Failing with FetchException:Cancelled:null:-1:null:false:null:null but already started decode FetchException:Cancelled:null:-1:null:false:null:null

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread Matthew Toseland
> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060823/3c4f8295/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread Matthew Toseland
ct Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060823/cecde4c7/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread Lars Juel Nielsen
On 8/23/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote: > With 0.5's opennet you don't have to exchange node references. At all. > Your node does it for you. And you'll usually have around 400 > connections with the default settings. And 0.5 has more content and > probably more users, though I'm not sure on

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
My bad. 400 known nodes. Though...I have 50 connections right now and I'm not doing anything. Not running frost, not surving any sites...all inbound I guess. On 8/23/06, Matthew Toseland wrote: > 400 connections? I hardly ever saw more than 100. > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 09:09:59AM -0400,

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread diddle...@hotmail.com
I'm new to Freenet and have been watching the discussion about version 0.5 vs 0.7. I'm not sure what is meant when the 0.5 advocates talk about OpenNet, so could someone enlighten me? I went to the Freenet site hoping to find information related to 0.5, even in the WIKI, but it now only

[freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread freenetw...@web.de
next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060823/670269ee/attachment.html>

[freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread Stefan Grönberg
; Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060823/36bc8cdf/attachment.html>

[freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread freenetw...@web.de
try setting the log level from NORMAL to ERROR. also... why are your logs this big? o_O On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:09:09 +0200, Stefan Gr??nberg wrote: >is there any way to limit the log size so i dont keep getting 1 gig logs >all the time? > >ive set max 100k lines in ram, 10M in ram >and 50M

[freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread Stefan Grönberg
is there any way to limit the log size so i dont keep getting 1 gig logs all the time? ive set max 100k lines in ram, 10M in ram and 50M Maximum disk space used by old logs still getting several hunderes meg sized logs

[freenet-support] datastores

2006-08-23 Thread Stefan Grönberg
Which datastores can i delete so my inserts still can resume at what ever % they are at current state?

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
With 0.5's opennet you don't have to exchange node references. At all. Your node does it for you. And you'll usually have around 400 connections with the default settings. And 0.5 has more content and probably more users, though I'm not sure on that one. On 8/23/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread Ian Clarke
first world war. Ian. Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/2006

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread Ian Clarke
On 22 Aug 2006, at 20:37, an ominous cow herd wrote:You never experienced World War I, but I bet you know something about it.Yes, but I wouldn't lecture those who had actually experienced it, and I think you will find Freenet 0.7 a somewhat more pleasant experience than the first world war.Ian.

[freenet-support] datastores

2006-08-23 Thread Stefan Grönberg
Which datastores can i delete so my inserts still can resume at what ever % they are at current state? ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at

[freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread Stefan Grönberg
is there any way to limit the log size so i dont keep getting 1 gig logs all the time? ive set max 100k lines in ram, 10M in ram and 50M Maximum disk space used by old logs still getting several hunderes meg sized logs ___ Support mailing list

Re: [freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
try setting the log level from NORMAL to ERROR. also... why are your logs this big? o_O On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:09:09 +0200, Stefan Grönberg wrote: is there any way to limit the log size so i dont keep getting 1 gig logs all the time? ive set max 100k lines in ram, 10M in ram and 50M

Re: [freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread Stefan Grönberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: try setting the log level from NORMAL to ERROR. its at minor atm since i got tons of problems daily with my node. also... why are your logs this big? o_O same as above id guess, i get perhaps 5-15gig logs a day or something On Wed, 23 Aug 2006

Re: [freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
try to avoid setting the log level to DEBUG or MINOR.. that's insane - no wonder your logs are that big :D then again i suppose "Maximum disk space used by old logs" should work nevetheless if i understand it's purpose correctly... --Original Message Text--- From: Stefan Grönberg

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread diddler4u
I'm new to Freenet and have been watching the discussion about version 0.5 vs 0.7. I'm not sure what is meant when the 0.5 advocates talk about OpenNet, so could someone enlighten me? I went to the Freenet site hoping to find information related to 0.5, even in the WIKI, but it now only

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9814
With 0.5's opennet you don't have to exchange node references. At all. Your node does it for you. And you'll usually have around 400 connections with the default settings. And 0.5 has more content and probably more users, though I'm not sure on that one. On 8/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread Lars Juel Nielsen
On 8/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With 0.5's opennet you don't have to exchange node references. At all. Your node does it for you. And you'll usually have around 400 connections with the default settings. And 0.5 has more content and probably more users, though I'm not sure

Re: [freenet-support] Logs

2006-08-23 Thread Matthew Toseland
Yes it will work, however it only works for old logs i.e. gzipped logs; it doesn't limit the size of either a single gzipped logfile, or the uncompressed freenet-latest etc logs. On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:09:17PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: try to avoid setting the log level to DEBUG or

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread Matthew Toseland
400 connections? I hardly ever saw more than 100. On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 09:09:59AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With 0.5's opennet you don't have to exchange node references. At all. Your node does it for you. And you'll usually have around 400 connections with the default settings. And

[freenet-support] Caught a FetchException

2006-08-23 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current svn snapshot: Aug 23, 2006 17:08:08:818 (freenet.client.async.SplitFileFetcherSegment, FCP input handler for /127.0.0.1:2580, ERROR): Failing with FetchException:Cancelled:null:-1:null:false:null:null but already started decode FetchException:Cancelled:null:-1:null:false:null:null

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread Ortwin Regel
The stable version of WW1 was so much better...On 8/23/06, Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 22 Aug 2006, at 20:37, an ominous cow herd wrote:You never experienced World War I, but I bet you know something about it. Yes, but I wouldn't lecture those who had actually experienced it, and I

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9814
My bad. 400 known nodes. Though...I have 50 connections right now and I'm not doing anything. Not running frost, not surving any sites...all inbound I guess. On 8/23/06, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 400 connections? I hardly ever saw more than 100. On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 953

2006-08-23 Thread Matthew Toseland
Freenet 0.7 build 953 is now available. It should be deployed through the auto-updater very soon, and it is already downloadable through the update scripts. Please upgrade. Changelogs: 953: - Probably fix insert resuming (again!!) - Turn off aggressiveGC for now - Restart non-global persistent

[freenet-support] System error 1067

2006-08-23 Thread simon gallienne
Hi there.I am new to this so please bear with me.I am trying to install Freenet and find I am unable to connect to it. It appears to have not installed properly and was wondering if I could get some advice on what to do to be able to install it correctly or if it is how to fix the error listed

Re: [freenet-support] System error 1067

2006-08-23 Thread Matthew Toseland
Please try again, nextgens has changed something in the installer that might help. On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 10:12:20PM +0100, simon gallienne wrote: Hi there. I am new to this so please bear with me. I am trying to install Freenet and find I am unable to connect to it. It appears to have

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread nobody
This is a Type III anonymous message, sent to you by the Winston Smith Project Dantooine mixminion server at Dantooine.winstonsmith.info. If you do not want to receive anonymous messages, please contact pbox- [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more information about anonymity, see

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread Nicholas Sturm
Please foreward a copy of the unstable version of WW1. Thank you. - Original Message - From: Ortwin Regel To: support@freenetproject.org Sent: 8/23/2006 1:39:36 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 The stable version of WW1 was so much better... On 8/23/06, Ian

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread Matthew Toseland
Why bother even anonymizing your emails if you insist on running an unsupported (and therefore seriously insecure) operating system? On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 09:03:55PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a Type III anonymous message, sent to you by the Winston Smith Project Dantooine

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9814
0.7 isn't a stable version either. It's a not nearly completed, far from functional version. On 8/23/06, Ortwin Regel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 0.5 isn't a stable version. It's an outdated version that many people happen to use. Of course you can keep using 0.5 and slowly watch it die, or even

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread Ortwin Regel
Wrong, it works quite well so it's functional. It's not completed but it needs users to progress.On 8/24/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:0.7 isn't a stable version either. It's a not nearly completed, farfrom functional version.On 8/23/06, Ortwin Regel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 0.5

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9814
It has no opennet. As far as I'm concerned, it's useless. On 8/23/06, Ortwin Regel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wrong, it works quite well so it's functional. It's not completed but it needs users to progress. On 8/24/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 0.7 isn't a stable version

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread Ian Clarke
Please move this conversation to the chat mailing list, it really doesn't belong here.Ian. Ian Clarke: Co-Founder Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog ___ Support mailing list

Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread an ominous cow herd
Mine fluctuates between 100 and 200 active connections with 800 known nodes. I have seen people bragging about having several hundred active connections and thousands of known nodes. On Wednesday 23 August 2006 11:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My bad. 400 known nodes. Though...I have 50