I am able to upload and download files using the browser but Thaw is not doing
the trick.
The message for either upload or download:
Thaw had some trouble using Direct Disk Access.
I am running the newest FREENET in a Darknet set up.
I am running Thaw under Windows/XP.
The file is a text file
I have my web hosting service with ssh access. I installed Java 1.6 and made
sure that the "java" command is picked up before the default java (openJDK)
using $PATH.
I had the service open port and I can now access via the browser at home
the freenet screen after I made changes to freenet.
I am trying to add multiple 24/7 servers to the freenet cause but I have run
into problems.
I basically had to go one by one to do it manually.
1) wget to obtain latest version.
2) tar -xz...
3) 1run.sh
4) run.sh
It seems I then need to go via the browser to http://localhost: to complete
the
> You shouldn't run into problems doing a direct copy, assuming you
> change the four ports mentioned in freenet.ini. You will simply have
> multiple instances of freenet running, each accessible via it's own
> http port, each accessing it's own udp data pipes/local sockets. I
> think.
thank you
> > > You shouldn't run into problems doing a direct copy, assuming you
> > > change the four ports mentioned in freenet.ini. You will simply have
> > > multiple instances of freenet running, each accessible via it's own
> > > http port, each accessing it's own udp data pipes/local sockets. I
> >
I don't have root access to my machine.
I installed Sun Java 1.6 in my own user directory.
I created a java a soft link in $HOME/bin.
But I cannot put $HOME/bin ahead of the other libraries in $PATH.
How can I force freenet to use the java version in $HOME/bin?
Or if this is not the right approach
> Don't do that. Edit the "wrapper.java.command=java" line
> in the wrapper.conf file.
This is a nice clean solution. Thank you.
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http
> I'm currently working on a bartPE install of Freenet. I have a working
> system now (I'll post that in the thread I started about this), however
> I hit the same type of problems.
> What I did in the end was to install freenet on a clean PC, run the
> wizard once and then copy all the installati
I am trying to figure things out about how freenet 0.7 darknet works by using
live systems.
It would be beneficial to set up a couple of machines in a lab using the same
LAN.
When I tried this, freenet is complaining that all the machines are in a chain
(only one public IP address via a NAT).
I
> Edit the "wrapper.java.command=java" line
> in the wrapper.conf file.
I must be doing something wrong.
I started from scratch by deleting the freenet directory followed by a "tar
-xzvf freenet...tar.gz".
Then, I changed wrapper.con file as follow:
wrapper.java.command=$HOME/bin/java
I did a
> Freenet 0.7.5 build 1276 is now available.
> Please upgrade, especially if you run a seednode.
Terrific, I will upgrade my multiple nodes to this new build.
I have a question and I hope I am understanding the concept of seednodes.
Does the concept of seednodes apply to Darknets?
Specifically
> When you say "multiple darknets" -- do you mean disconnected from
> the rest of "opennet" / separate networks, with only content provided
> by those nodes?
When I say "multiple darknets" I mean completely separate but under an off-band
control.
For example, I create a darknet for my tennis fr
>> When I say "multiple darknets" I mean completely separate but under
>> an off-band control.
> Not possible. Unless you can force your people not to enable opennet,
> or not to add other darknet peers who have access to the opennet (or
> access to your
> Freenet will route through that node (any request that is not
> found in the "local darknet", and vice versa, "outside" opennet searches
> will hopefully penetrate into that dark corner.)
If by ignorance or unintentionally a member joins another darknet
> Yes, effectively. (Opennet behaves a little differently -- your
> neighbouring peers are constantly being swapped and optimized to
> approach a small-world topology.)
Does this mean that in Darknet mode the peers are not swapped?
> The main advantage, I believe, is security -- opennet nodes
> they can also in theory replace all of your peers,
> and thus know what keys you are downloading/uploading.
Isn't the content also encrypted? What good are the keys for to lead back to
the originating node?
>> Given that this would take quite a bit of
> To move in DarkNet you actually have to go and talk to a person... something
> like "Hi, do you mind introducing me to some of your friends?" which may work
> only sometimes.
It seems that we are pushing technology to the point that a breakdown to remain
anonymous could be
our human conditio
>> But we have been wrong before in regards to technology. So can we say
>> that the anonymity problem in P2P networks is solved?
> No, no we can't. As we've discussed, OpenNet is a tradeoff of anonymity
> for useability (no need to laboriously find/add fr
18 matches
Mail list logo
