help-gnunet
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Help-gnunet] Major problems on RH7.2


From: I. Wronsky
Subject: [Help-gnunet] Major problems on RH7.2
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 16:56:36 +0300 (EEST)

I couldn't get gnunet0.3.3 to operate successfully on RH7.2. 
There seems to be atleast a couple of problems. 

- Setting ACTIVEMIGRATION to YES causes gnunetd to loop
forever in common/lookup.c/findLeastImportant(). I did
a bit of debugging and it seems to be related to gnunetd
creating empty files on startup, and then on 

j = read(LOOKUP_handle_, &entry, sizeof(ContentIndex));

either a zero is returned or "on demand encoding or free"
happens and thus LOOKUP_lips_count_ is never increased from
zero. Or atleast it looks like that with a quick glance.

- After kludging my way around the last one, I noticed that
the session keys are rarely ever accepted, as the
key length is usually something quite different from the
defined 128/8. I didn't even begin to look at this one, 
as it might be anything starting from incompatible ssl libs.


SKEY: Accepting sessionkey from host 
1DFB08D70FE20550FF04A9130E39D5A2AAE09AAA.
SKEY rejected from host 1DFB08D70FE20550FF04A9130E39D5A2AAE09AAA (address 
128.211.  1. 61: 2086): key.len = 17457

...

Or has someone got gnunetd working with RH7.2 without tweaking
the code? Redhat is, after all, one of the most popular linux distroes 
and if gnunets usability depends on many hosts participating, its 
mandatory that the system can be easily, straightforwardly and
reliably used on the most popular distributions. Otherwise, 
unfortunately, it has good chances of fading into obscurity: too 
much publicity before a stable and usable ref. implementation 
is available can be harmful. See e.g. freenet, which has seen 
no end of bad press and deserting hosts, mainly because the 
system hasn't been able to deliver what it promises due to 
several implementation bugs and problems which just do not 
seem to go away.

I hope gnunet will not end up in the same limbo. ;)





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]