Why are there different minimum config file requirements?

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Post Reply
ETA_2025
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:43 am
Hardware configuration: NVIDIA RTX 4070
10 x Raspberry Pi 5 Model B 2GB RAM
10 x Raspberry Pi 4 Model B 2GB RAM
Location: VIC, Australia

Why are there different minimum config file requirements?

Post by ETA_2025 »

On installation on a Raspberry Pi, the config file contains:

Code: Select all

</config>
Oddly, with such a config file the Windows client won't load. To load, Windows requires:

Code: Select all

<config>
</config>
Why are there different requirements for the config file, for different systems.

Also, can the Windows client be restarted, without rebooting the computer?
Image
calxalot
Site Moderator
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 1:33 am
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

Re: Why are there different minimum config file requirements?

Post by calxalot »

I thought the default empty config on Linux was
<config/>

The xml parser should be identical on all platforms.

You can stop the Windows client via system tray item menu item quit.

Start it again from start menu or desktop shortcut.

Logging out will also kill the client, but it is recommended to pause folding from the sys tray menu first. It can take up to a minute for all cores to exit.
ETA_2025
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:43 am
Hardware configuration: NVIDIA RTX 4070
10 x Raspberry Pi 5 Model B 2GB RAM
10 x Raspberry Pi 4 Model B 2GB RAM
Location: VIC, Australia

Re: Why are there different minimum config file requirements?

Post by ETA_2025 »

calxalot wrote: Fri Jan 24, 2025 4:10 am I thought the default empty config on Linux was
<config/>
No, the config files end with </config>. The same as quotes end with [/quote]
The xml parser should be identical on all platforms.
I would have thought so, but my the client wouldn't start on my PC with just </config>.
Start it again from start menu or desktop shortcut.
This doesn't work on my system. But, as I shouldn't need to stop the client, as I've sorted out the config file, it shouldn't be a problem for me.
Image
calxalot
Site Moderator
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 1:33 am
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

Re: Why are there different minimum config file requirements?

Post by calxalot »

It is <config/> in debian post install.

https://github.com/FoldingAtHome/fah-cl ... ostinst.in
ETA_2025
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:43 am
Hardware configuration: NVIDIA RTX 4070
10 x Raspberry Pi 5 Model B 2GB RAM
10 x Raspberry Pi 4 Model B 2GB RAM
Location: VIC, Australia

Re: Why are there different minimum config file requirements?

Post by ETA_2025 »

calxalot wrote: Fri Jan 24, 2025 5:00 am It is <config/> in debian post install.

https://github.com/FoldingAtHome/fah-cl ... ostinst.in
I can't explain why that page contains incorrect xml code, but everywhere else its </config> as in <end config>.

If I create a config file with:

Code: Select all

<config>
<config/>
My browser displays it as:

Code: Select all

<config>
<config/>
</config>
Note the </config> added at the end.

Also, How to headless install ? (Ubuntu Server) #214 contains:

Code: Select all

<config>
  <account-token v="<your account token>"/>
  <machine-name v="<a good display name for this machine>"/>
</config> 
Image
calxalot
Site Moderator
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 1:33 am
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

Re: Why are there different minimum config file requirements?

Post by calxalot »

If you see the three lines in log that is a logging error.

<element></element>

is equivalent to

<element/>

Just </element> alone is invalid xml.
ETA_2025
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:43 am
Hardware configuration: NVIDIA RTX 4070
10 x Raspberry Pi 5 Model B 2GB RAM
10 x Raspberry Pi 4 Model B 2GB RAM
Location: VIC, Australia

Re: Why are there different minimum config file requirements?

Post by ETA_2025 »

Indeed you are correct. My memory was obviously wrong, and I'm not an expert at XML.
calxalot wrote: Fri Jan 24, 2025 8:29 am <element></element>

is equivalent to

<element/>
Thank you. Your explanation makes perfect sense.

And, that explains why I needed the extra line in the Windows config file.
Image
Post Reply