Questions and Answers :
Macintosh :
Bionic wouldn't run properly
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Robert A. Black Send message Joined: 31 May 99 Posts: 1 Credit: 174,722 RAC: 0 |
The Bionic instructions were incorrect. The proper command to make a file executable under UNIX is chmod 755 filename. Further, during the setup phase, the default asked for 100 Gb of disk space - very funny - I have only 40 in total, about 10 available. I cut this back to 2. When I ran, the software said "not enough resources allocated - see text below. In short, Bionic isn't ready for prime-time. 2004-07-13 08:27:55 [http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/] Project prefs: using your defaults 2004-07-13 08:27:55 [http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/] Host ID not assigned yet 2004-07-13 08:27:55 [---] No general preferences found - using BOINC defaults 2004-07-13 08:27:55 [---] Running CPU benchmarks 2004-07-13 08:27:55 [---] Suspending computation and network activity - running CPU benchmarks 2004-07-13 08:28:56 [---] Benchmark results: 2004-07-13 08:28:56 [---] Number of CPUs: 1 2004-07-13 08:28:56 [---] 371 double precision MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU 2004-07-13 08:28:56 [---] 844 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU 2004-07-13 08:28:56 [---] Finished CPU benchmarks 2004-07-13 08:28:57 [---] Resuming computation and network activity 2004-07-13 08:28:57 [---] Fewer active results than CPUs; requesting more work 2004-07-13 08:28:57 [---] Fewer active results than CPUs; requesting more work 2004-07-13 08:28:57 [http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/] Requesting 17280 seconds of work 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/] Sending request to scheduler: http://setiboinc data.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/] Scheduler RPC to http://setiboincdata.ssl.berk eley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi succeeded 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/] General preferences have been updated 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [SETI@home] Message from server: No work available (there was work but you don't have enough disk space allocated) 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [SETI@home] Message from server: No work available (there was work but you don't have enough disk space allocated) 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [---] General prefs: from SETI@home (last modified 2004-07-13 08:22:13) 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [---] General prefs: no separate prefs for work; using your defaults 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [SETI@home] Project prefs: no separate prefs for work; using your defaults 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [SETI@home] Deferring communication with project for 1 hours, 0 minutes, and 0 s econds 2004-07-13 08:28:58 [SETI@home] Deferring communication with project for 1 hours, 0 minutes, and 0 s econds ^C2004-07-13 08:30:44 [---] Received signal 2 2004-07-13 08:30:45 [---] Exit requested by user |
Colin Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 9 Credit: 40,998 RAC: 0 |
No, the instructions are correct. "chmod +x filename" is the best way to add executability to a file. Your method, "chmod 755 filename", not only adds the x bit but also assigns read permission for everyone and denies write permission for all but the user. Thus it's a little too broad to use in general instructions. Edit: Mmm, u+x, even better. (Adds executability only for the owner of the file.) |
Pathogen Send message Joined: 17 May 99 Posts: 34 Credit: 13,549 RAC: 0 |
"The Bionic instructions were incorrect. The proper command to make a file executable under UNIX is chmod 755 filename." *** You are right. This is what they had. Type 'chmod +x boinc_2.12_powerpc-apple-darwin7.0.0' (without the quotes) This is what it should have been. Type 'chmod u+x boinc_2.12_powerpc-apple-darwin7.0.0' (without the quotes) (Notice the 'u' before the plus sign) |
Pathogen Send message Joined: 17 May 99 Posts: 34 Credit: 13,549 RAC: 0 |
> No, the instructions are correct. "chmod +x filename" is the best way to add > executability to a file. Your method, "chmod 755 filename", not only adds the > x bit but also assigns read permission for everyone and denies write > permission for all but the user. Thus it's a little too broad to use in > general instructions. *** I agree with you about 755. Using +x, however, without specifying 'u' for user gives everyone execute perms, which is probably not desired. |
Pathogen Send message Joined: 17 May 99 Posts: 34 Credit: 13,549 RAC: 0 |
> Edit: Mmm, u+x, even better. (Adds executability only for the owner of the > file.) *** Ooops, I just saw you edited and added the 'u' right after I submitted. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.