aMule Forum

English => aMule News => Topic started by: Kry on January 23, 2006, 11:18:03 AM

Title: Known bug
Post by: Kry on January 23, 2006, 11:18:03 AM
Today's tarball will rehash all your files AND give errors about it. Blame Xaignar :)

(It's safe, but highly annoying - 99% CPU while hashing)
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Armin76 on January 23, 2006, 12:30:11 PM
For me its OK, that means that the team keep working on aMule, and thats a good thing.
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Kry on January 23, 2006, 12:42:05 PM
Now THAT is the spirit :)
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Fab-Ko on January 23, 2006, 01:31:04 PM
Can i use the actuall tarball, without the risk of killing my files?  ?(

@kry: do you have resolved this silly KAD-Reconnect-Bug?

Greets
Fab-Ko

P.S.: Nice work, amuled rules ;)
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Kry on January 23, 2006, 01:55:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fab-Ko
Can i use the actuall tarball, without the risk of killing my files?  ?(

I said that it's annoying but safe on the first post. "Safe" as in usually tarball safeness.

Quote
Originally posted by Fab-Ko
@kry: do you have resolved this silly KAD-Reconnect-Bug?

As I stated on the threads, I can't fix a bug that I can't see.

Quote
Originally posted by Fab-Ko
P.S.: Nice work, amuled rules ;)

Thanks :)
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: thedude0001 on January 23, 2006, 02:35:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fab-Ko
Can i use the actuall tarball, without the risk of killing my files?  ?(

No, you can't. But that basically goes for ALL SVN tarballs. Guys, the tarballs are for people who want the bleeding edge of untested code. Coders make mistakes, and if they don't find them themselves the users of the tarballs are probably the ones who find those bugs. And "bug" can always mean "catastrophic failure". If you're not OK with that go use the stable version which is well tested ;)
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Xaignar on January 23, 2006, 04:11:36 PM
Hey, nobody's perfect. :P
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Kry on January 23, 2006, 05:26:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Xaignar
Hey, nobody's perfect. :P

I am nobody!
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Fab-Ko on January 23, 2006, 11:47:02 PM
I'm a gentoo-user, i want the bleeding edge ;)

But these KAD don't reconnect problem ist still there... is already on the Bugtracker.

and... the amulegui can connect right now, without errors :D

THX  :baby:
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Austiniste on January 24, 2006, 02:23:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Xaignar
Hey, nobody's perfect. :P

Except me ! :] :P ;)
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Kry on January 24, 2006, 07:58:48 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Fab-Ko
But these KAD don't reconnect problem ist still there... is already on the Bugtracker.

I said it millions of times and I'm starting to get fed up on it: I DON'T see the bug, so I CAN'T fix it.
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: OldFrog on January 29, 2006, 12:02:18 PM
Maybe stupid me (not the first ime), but I have some concerns with current snapshot (Jan 29th).
I already ran snapshots since Jan 24th and the infamous rehashing thing ( :-P ) but didn't pay attention as I was not home.
But as of today, I have these :

* no icon in systray (1h after amule started)
* no gui
* 70% to 90% CPU use, not constant, so I doubt it's in a loop, and only 2.2% memory used

Code: [Select]
Mem:    515440k total,   480040k used,    35400k free,    25888k buffers
Swap:   506008k total,   178740k used,   327268k free,   209752k cached

  PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
18830 louis     25   0  131m  11m 6396 R 92.1  2.2  52:41.26 amule
 5090 louis     39  19 17440 1320  368 R  4.7  0.3   7:36.44 FahCore_82.exe
 4999 root      15   0  123m  48m 3204 S  2.3  9.6   3:56.99 X
18792 louis     15   0 29036 7800 6200 S  0.3  1.5   0:01.95 konsole


It runs as I can see in the terminal

Quote
mule --I-am-scared-of-no-dangerous-code
Initialising aMule
Checking if there is an instance already running...
No other instances are running.
HTTP download thread started
Loading temp files from /mnt/stockage.
Loading PartFile 1 of 1
All PartFiles Loaded.
ListenSocket: Ok.

*** TCP socket (ECServer) listening on 0.0.0.0:8008
*** Server UDP socket (TCP+3) at 0.0.0.0:8005
*** TCP socket (TCP) listening on 0.0.0.0:8002
*** Client UDP socket (extended eMule) at 0.0.0.0:8006
Adding file /mnt/stockage/003.part.met to shares
Empty dir /mnt/ shared
Host: amule.sourceforge.net:80
URL: http://amule.sourceforge.net/lastversion
Response: 200 (Error: 0)
Download size: 6
HTTP download thread ended

I share ~126 files, mean size is ~400MB

What should I do doctor, kill the poor thing so it doesn't suffer any more ?

Or is it re-hashing again
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: OldFrog on January 29, 2006, 12:09:32 PM
I killed it and started it again. I can see the gui loading, and the icon. the kad connects at first, then it looks for ed2k servers

But as soon as it's connected to a ed2k server, I can't retrieve the gui again (no action on dbl/click or right-click on the icon), and CPU use is up to 90%.

Computing will never be a true science  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Xaignar on January 29, 2006, 12:10:58 PM
OldFrog: Try removing the known2*.met files from your .aMule folder.
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: OldFrog on January 29, 2006, 12:22:36 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Xaignar
OldFrog: Try removing the known2*.met files from your .aMule folder.

Ok, thanks for the tip.

Did it and same punishment.

Anyway, I found out I messed my libs, and compiled again wxGtk-2.6.2u-nosdl (all patched ) instead of wxGtk-CVS (pre-2.7) I usually have. So I'll build again and give it a try. Stay on air !
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: OldFrog on January 29, 2006, 01:14:01 PM
Recomppiled against wxGtk-CVS as of 2005-01-03, and still the same.

Code: [Select]
tail -f .aMule/logfile
2006-01-29 13:08:58: Fichier de Crédits chargé, il y a 30142 clients connus
2006-01-29 13:08:59:
2006-01-29 13:08:59:  - Ceci est aMule CVS using wxGTK2 v2.7.0 (Snapshot: Sun Jan 29 07:02:07 CET 2006) basé sur eMule.
2006-01-29 13:08:59:    Tourne sur Linux 2.6.12-14mdk i686
2006-01-29 13:08:59:  - Visitez [URL]http://www.amule.org[/URL] pour vérifier si une nouvelle version estdisponible.
2006-01-29 13:08:59:
2006-01-29 13:08:59: Chargement des fichiers ipfilter.dat.
2006-01-29 13:09:01: 127025 rang d'IP chargés depuis 'ipfilter.dat'. 0 lignes malformées ont été mises de coté.
2006-01-29 13:09:01: 0 rang d'IP chargés depuis 'ipfilter_static.dat'. 0 lignes malformées ont été mises de coté.
2006-01-29 13:09:01: Chargement du fichier server.met: /home/louis/.aMule/server.met
2006-01-29 13:10:29: 6739 serveurs trouvés dans server.met
2006-01-29 13:10:29: 2 fichiers .part trouvés
2006-01-29 13:10:29: *** TCP socket (ECServer) listening on 0.0.0.0:8008
2006-01-29 13:10:29: MuleUDPSocket: Created Server UDP-Socket at port 8005
2006-01-29 13:10:29: MuleUDPSocket: Created Client UDP-Socket at port 8006
2006-01-29 13:10:30: 127 Fichier(s) partagé(s) connu(s) trouvé(s)
2006-01-29 13:10:30: Connexion en cours
2006-01-29 13:10:30: Servers: Trying to connect
2006-01-29 13:10:30: Connexion à  Razorback (195.245.244.243 - 195.245.244.243:4661)
2006-01-29 13:10:30: 184 contacts Kad lus
2006-01-29 13:10:31: Deleted stale lock file '/home/louis/.aMule/muleLock'.
2006-01-29 13:10:31: ThreadScheduler: Completed task 'AICH Syncronizing', 125 tasks remaining.
2006-01-29 13:10:31: Hasher: Starting to create AICH hash for file: XXXXXXXXXXXXX
2006-01-29 13:10:31: Votre copie d'aMule est à  jour.
2006-01-29 13:10:31: Délai d'attente de la connexion à  Razorback (195.245.244.243:4661) dépassé.
2006-01-29 13:10:31: Servers: Trying to connect
2006-01-29 13:10:31: Connexion à  .S.E.D.G. 400k (38.119.96.15 - 38.119.96.15:4661)
2006-01-29 13:10:32: Connecté à  Kad (pare-feu)

And it stays there forever.

Looks like in today's snapshot there's something going wrong for my rig when rehashing, as in another try, connection lines went first, then rehashing ilne, and always only one line with rehash.
When connecting back with aMule-2.1.0, rehashing is ok and much faster (and uses much less CPU).
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Xaignar on January 29, 2006, 01:49:17 PM
I'm afraid that I can't make head and tail of your description. What exactly is going wrong?
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: wuischke on January 29, 2006, 01:54:48 PM
2006-01-29 13:10:32: Connecté à  Kad (pare-feu)
This means: Connected to Kad (firewalled)

I guess this is what he means.
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: Xaignar on January 29, 2006, 05:04:53 PM
In any case, I'll have to advice against running the current snapshot, since I noticed a couple of mistakes made yesterday (by myself no less) that causes aMule to enter an inf. loop. As for the message, Kad always starts out firewalled.
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: OldFrog on January 29, 2006, 06:06:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Xaignar
I'm afraid that I can't make head and tail of your description. What exactly is going wrong?

Sorry, I had some real life :-D


What I mean is the snapshot runs flawlessly until it says it starts re-hashing, eventually it tells it's connected, and nothing is displayed any more, and it stays like that for at least 20 mlinutes, with 92% cpu and still hashing (I guess) the same single file.

I reran 2.1.0. It displays the same messages, but every 2 minutes it tells me it hashes a new file giving the name and telling how many are remaining. And it eats only 40% CPU doing that.

As you said, I'm afraid I entered an infinite loop anyway.

It didn't happen with yesterday's snapshot.

Sorry for the french-unicoded lines, I was in a hurry and didn't take time to put them back in english.

No trouble at all with kad (It always tells it's firewalled for a few seconds after connecting, as I use a router, then it's ok), my only concern is there seems to be a loop when hashing, or during the time it's hashing the very first file.

Thanks for your job, devs, it's now a huge work you did on this software. :baby:
Title: Re: Known bug
Post by: OldFrog on January 30, 2006, 07:28:06 AM
As for now, looks like it's solved in Jan 30th's snapshot. the mule has already hashed 5 files and kry is an awful liar : it eats 70% CPU only. Thanks a lot  ;) :baby: