Boinc 7.0.24/Ubuntu computation errors

Oh well, I give up.

Even though I followed the instructions and installed Boincs own 7.0.26 and not 7.0.24 from repository, I still get this:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2418178646

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2417963293

Both AP and MB

Computer is this one, many many failed tasks...

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=6637638

Luckily I got it stopped before it ruined all my allocated WU's.

I'll wait for this to get fixed properly!

But thanks for trying to help xclusive :)
____________

Glad I helped you get it running, but it seems like the w-u's are failing for some other reason than mine were. blah. I'm sorry.

This is why I'm pushing the *buntu/Debian package folks for a proper fix.

This is unacceptable. I have a running Boinc, that's about it. They need to work this out, or many causal Linux folks will say screw this.
____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33

There should be a way to install the boinc package from the 10.04 repository into 12.04.... This would give you a properly working install, just a little older...

I don't have time now, but perhaps later I'll look into how to do that.
____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33

John:

I did.

Do "sudo apt-get remove boinc-manager"
and "sudo apt-get remove boinc-client"

And the original repository install was uninstalled via the repository.

But I see your point about it being 7.0.24, but it should not be.

I will try one last time to install 7.0.26 on top of all this. If this fails I'm going to stop for now.

____________

John:

I did.

Do "sudo apt-get remove boinc-manager"
and "sudo apt-get remove boinc-client"

And the original repository install was uninstalled via the repository.

But I see your point about it being 7.0.24, but it should not be.

I will try one last time to install 7.0.26 on top of all this. If this fails I'm going to stop for now.

I actually got it to run now.

Reporting 7.0.26 in Boinc Manager.

Its crunching away on two AP WU's and DL'ing more.

And I have merged the computer with the old install, so its downloading the rest of the old WU's.

Now on to intalling optimized apps, and making it start on bootup. Hope I dont mess it up...
____________

Good luck friend. one thing at a time. this way if you break it you'll know how to change it right back.

(and optimized aps is not anything I've done yet, I was waiting to get my server up to 12.04 first, (and that broke boinc), and now I'm gonna wait to have a clean repository install of 7.something.thatworks, but I know even running at 50% that would greatly increase my output)
____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33

Do I have a problem in having installed BOINC as root?

It doesn't seem to want to run without me doing sudo -s, before launching it.

It works when done that way, but I cant see its task in the system monitor.

Got the optimized apps running, so that works.

When the repository version is reported working, I will install that, and use it instead of this hack-job install :)
____________

IT's not really a problem if it's running as root.

It works when done that way, but I cant see its task in the system monitor.

Thanks.

"ps axf | grep AK" shows that the optimized clients are running on all 4 cores.

karsten@Ubuntu-server:~$ ps axf | grep AK
14085 pts/0 RNl+ 57:24 | \_ ../../projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu/AK_V8_linux64_sse3
14086 pts/0 RNl+ 22:55 | \_ ../../projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu/AK_V8_linux64_sse3
30593 pts/0 RNl+ 22:18 | \_ ../../projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu/AK_V8_linux64_sse3
31895 pts/0 RNl+ 19:41 | \_ ../../projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu/AK_V8_linux64_sse3

So all seems to be working. Work is also being reported back and even validated.

I also tried adding the crontab as root, will see if it works on next reboot.
____________

^[Off topic, but this^ is the beginning of a Linux junkie. It's how it all starts :-)]

Looking good...

So tonight (or as soon as my AP units all finish) I will be testing a new repository package of 7.0.26. :-)

Compiled specifically as a solution to our issue.

If it works that package will be pushed into the Ubuntu repository for 12.04!

I will update if it works, and update again if/when it's put in the repository.



:-D :-D
____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33

I don't want to be a party-pooper, but the BOINC trunk code is up to v7.0.27 now, and the Linux build - the last of the three major platforms to be built - was put online about an hour ago.

The bugfixes in .27 are less dramatic than the problems in .24 that started this thread, but they are pretty important, just the same. I wouldn't presume to advise you on package maintenance - there are arguments both ways, both for incremental fixes and for holding back for a single 'best of breed' one-time upgrade - but I just thought I'd better warn you that .26 isn't the end of the line.

Yes, but I'm speaking only about the Ubuntu repository versions which have had an issue since 7.0.24.

[The Debian and Ubuntu package maintainers are aware that their compiles have an error affecting s@h and possibly others. They are trying to figure out what it is, and I think in time they will. In the meantime the Ubuntu package maintainer has been nice enough to compile one for us that doesn't have the debian patches that are assumed to be breaking it. As I said once it's tested and works they will be using it in the standard Ubuntu 12.04 repo, as a band-aid until they really get their issue nailed]

They expect 7.0.27 wont have this issue when they compile it for the repository, the Debian guys are looking into it. One thing at a time. Even 7.0.26 is too new for the standard repository IMO, but if this specific compile has been built in a fashion that actually will work, than that's the package they should use in the standard repository for now...

In the meantime we (Ubuntu users) will at least have a working version that the causal user can install with a package manager. [People use Ubuntu for simplicity, it defeats the purpose if they can't use a package manager to get crunching s@h with Boinc]

When they get the repository package bumped to 7.0.27 (or something else) is another issue.

But any working package in the Ubuntu repository will be better than the one that doesn't work. :-)
____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33

So we know that the repository package is being broken (for S@H) due to a Debian patch used while compiling the Debian/Ubuntu repository package of Boinc 7.0.24.

Through process of elimination we will figure out which patch needs to be fixed.

A fix is in the works, that's all I can offer for now.

And I apologize for the few errored or dropped work-units I have and will produce here and there. Sorry wingmen. I'm keeping it to an absolute minimum. Apparently as the one bringing their bug to their attention, I get the honor of testing for them. LOL

Steffen Moeller, who is the Debian package maintainer, is aware of the issue. He is working with us to figure out which Debian/Ubuntu patch needs to be fixed. Because of this future repository packages should be all set. :-)

Steffen had this to offer us:

"The bug is fixed by undoing some presumed improvements of mine. This needs some further investigation...
Maybe we should just fine those aliens quickly and have them fix it all for us...or eradicate man kind.

Cheers,

Steffen"

We're pretty sure we've narrowed down the repository bug to one specific patch! Luckily it's not a patch crucial to anything, as far as the Debian package maintainer believes.

Hopefully tomorrow the build will be put together and tested.

If it's a good build I think it will be pushed into the Ubuntu repository. This would be version 7.0.26 afaik.

7.0.27 is having issues being compiled at all by the Ubuntu folks, something is awry. So if this working version 7.0.26 ends up in the Ubuntu repository, we probably wouldn't see another version change in any Debian/Ubuntu repository until .28 at the soonest.

I'll update tomorrow or the day after if/when they put a working package in the Ubuntu repository.
____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33

:-D

The Debian/Ubuntu repository "instant computation error" bug is now known to be caused by "MoreInformativeAppStartFailure.patch"

I think the name of this patch is ironic considering the bug that it caused... (Perhaps they should have just named it "AppStartFailure.Patch")

There was some talk between the package maintainers about trying a 7.0.27 build without this patch, and testing that for the repository. We'll see what happens.

As I said were getting it figured out, a fix will be in the repository shortly.

:-)
____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33