PDA

View Full Version : Auto-update worked? Poll



Brian the Fist
04-02-2002, 11:42 AM
Did Auto-update work for you? Please answer only if you know for sure you were using a March 26 or later executable, as previous versions are known to have problems. Just want to establish if it is working or not still. Note that 'not working' is defined as you had to go and download the update manually from our web site.

Brian the Fist
04-02-2002, 11:47 AM
I you answer no, please post your OS, and whether you are using the screensaver, client or Windows service, as a reply to this message. Thanks

Alphauser
04-02-2002, 12:00 PM
Did not work. Did not even recognize the update was there and kept right on crunching the old protein, ignoring the 908 errors on upload.

OS: Tru64 UNIX

jkeating
04-02-2002, 12:15 PM
On Sunday night downloaded the latest zip file (just to be sure) and installed on Win98 and W2KServer (not running as a service) with the autoupdate.cfg file.

Got home on Monday night and all had updated and there were no leftover files.

Mobocastor
04-02-2002, 12:40 PM
My auto update worked on 3 Windows 2000 Professional machines and 1 ME machine. However I didn't trust the auto update (sorry) so I downloaded the new protein manually from the website. I had a ton of old files that did not upload from the previous run. I deleted the Distributed folding directory and started from scratch after downloading manually. Those old files have to go. May I suggest that your server accept those folds anyway even though we are no longer running that protein? At least it gets the old data of my disk.

vsemaska
04-02-2002, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by Alphauser
Did not work. Did not even recognize the update was there and kept right on crunching the old protein, ignoring the 908 errors on upload.

OS: Tru64 UNIX

I had the same experience with my Alphas. Had to download the client again in order to get it to work on the new protein.

Mobocastor
04-02-2002, 12:42 PM
I am using the text client version. Later.

SpongeBob SquarePants
04-02-2002, 01:32 PM
Ni!

I am running NT 4.0 SP6 as service on 6 machines. 1 worked.
NT 4.0 on regular client would not update. Would not take new update when restarted. Clean install then on second try it identified new update.
Clean installed on rest and now up to speed.

MY Win98 client updated after wasting about 4,000 on a run.

Maybe we can give credit for the first 24 hours of a new gene for old results. (And until Monday night if the changeover happens on a week-end.) Ni!


SpongeBob SquarePants

davelo
04-02-2002, 03:14 PM
Yes

Windows NT4/2000/XP service.

On a Win98 machine I forgot to create the autoupdate.cfg file, so I had to answer Yes for the update to happen.

ulv
04-02-2002, 03:52 PM
I had 5 clients running in W2K, all of them with -df. None autoupdated, had to Q(uit), start again, then they updated. Had to answer Y(es)- had no .cfg- file with 1.

Ody
04-02-2002, 04:45 PM
the only box that I was patient enough to wait with and that had the autoupdate.cfg file was one at home. Running Windows XP, the text client version, with the autoupdate.cfg (value of 1), it recognized that there was a new client out, but when I got home it was waiting for me to press "y"

guru
04-02-2002, 06:04 PM
Yesterday none of my solaris clients would auto update. They just complained of the wrong protein and restarted work on the old protein.

I Manually downloaded the new client and installed it on all my work systems and restarted it. I noticed that the upload interval was back to 5000 units. Today (after getting my DSL back up) I started upgrading my home systems. I did manage to get two solaris systems to auto update. Very slow and not automatic. I noticed that after they restarted they had a 10000 upload interval. I checked the file sizes between the auto updated version and the manual download version and found they are different.

If the auto update is not fixed this next time around I'm out of this project! I've stuck around through the other problems but if the simple things don't get fixed I'm not going to waste my time anymore!

guru

Brian the Fist
04-02-2002, 09:02 PM
I have verified that the auto-update fails on irix, on possibly some other UNIXes (but NOT linux). If autoupdate.cfg is present, the program may crash (a slight oversight on my part which will be fixed for the next release). If not present, it asks you if it should download, you say 'y' and then it proceeds to download, but then never continues.

Debugging showed that it is hanging deep inside the digital signature verification library. This is not my code and has not been tested thoroughly on all the UNIXes. I will try to figure out what is happening as it may just be a matter of me compiling it differently on the 64-bit platforms or something like that. Will get it fixed if possible ASAP. Worst case, I may have to disable signature checking on non-Linux UNIXes..

guru
04-02-2002, 09:35 PM
What about the fact that the auto update downloads a different client then what is available on the download site?

Also is there a change to get a 2.6 Solaris client built? If you need a system to compile it on I can provide it. The same goes for a true Solaris 64 bit client.

guru

Gollum
04-02-2002, 10:45 PM
The screensaver updated for me. I'm running Windows 98 on a 233MHz Pentium MMX so I'd say your getting pretty close to mass market appeal.:)

MAD-ness
04-03-2002, 10:22 PM
One screensaver on 98se worked fine.

Two services on WinXP worked fine.

One CLI client on win98se that I forgot to include an autoupdate.cfg file for worked fine, once I tried to upload data and hit "y". My third service probably worked, but I got impatient and reinstalled the client before I was positive, however, my guess is that it did auto-update correctly.

Much better this time, instead of having NONE of my installs update, all of them did so.

Brian the Fist
04-04-2002, 12:05 AM
Guru:

The update file is the same as what is posted on the site, but just contains the changed files.

As for the Solaris versions, I have only Solaris 8 so I cannot test/build for solaris 6. Because our build system is completely automated and some of our code is not open source as well, we build each version all on local machines. If we got our hands on an old Solaris 6 box we could easily add a version for that but having someone else do it for us, or even someone giving access to their machine remotely is not feasible for us at this time as our source code could be compromised. Donations of old crusty machines for new ports are always welcome (wink wink, nudge nudge).

As for 64-bit Solaris, we actually wanted to do so but apparently our version of Sun Workshop (which includes the compiler) is old and does not build 64-bit apps. Sun wanted us to shell out a few thousand dollars to get the newer compiler which would build 64-bit apps, from what I recall when we last looked into it. We decided at the time it wasn't worthwhile to get it :(
Not sure that a 64-bit version of the code would be any better/faster anyways.

We're still hoping to get our hands on an AIX box so we can build a version for that too..

Anyone interested in an Intel BeOS version by the way? We have lots of extra Intel boxes, we'd just have to figure out how to install and compile things on it..

guru
04-04-2002, 01:46 AM
Have you tried using the 64 bit version of gcc? I have a sparc 5 170 and a SS1000 (8 processors) that I can donate. Including the copy of solaris 6 and 7.

guru

guru
04-04-2002, 12:17 PM
Guru: The update file is the same as what is posted on the site, but just contains the changed files.


Then how come I have two different versions of the client? The one on the download site updates every 5000 structures and the one that auto updated updates every 10000 structures.

guru

Brian the Fist
04-04-2002, 05:46 PM
Guru:
Well, I guess I wont reveal any big secrets if I tell you - I have control of how many structures are made - 10000 right now. I could change it to 1000 or whatever else I want. That's to help prevent future server overloads. The 5000 you are seeing is the default if the machine is not on the internet (when it starts up). Thus only the 5000 is hard coded into the client, if you are on the net, we control the batch size from our side (which also makes it a lot easier for us to change on the fly).

Now, when you say 'donate', is that in the physical sense? Feel free to continue this conversation by e-mail (trades@mshri.on.ca)
We haven't used gcc since presumably cc produces 'better' code, and we had it all set up.