World: r3wp

it's the dns helper process.

rebol forks to be able to use gethostbyname() asynchronously (dns:///async)

Does anyone have a solution to run encapped 2.7.6 View on Ubuntu 
9.04 or 9.10? I'm stuck with our new server, Cheyenne binary (with 
built-in View) requires libstdc++.so.5 which is obsolete. Making 
a symlink to .so.6 doesn't work.

obsolete: can't Ubuntu tell the difference between the two libraries 
and keep both?

I've found the Debian package for libstdc++.so.5 but it needs an 
older version of gcc (3.3) that I can't manage to install on 9.04 
without messing up the system.

interesting

I'm not able to get a correct installation of libstdc++.so.5 deb 
package, it messes up the gcc lib dependencies.

Maybe I should really drop View support completly in Cheyenne.

I do think that it would make cheyenne installation much easier.

I guess that a 2.7.7 SDK should have cured that, View 2.7.7 seems 
to link to .so.6.

I've always thought that a gfx engine built in Cheyenne would have 
brought a nice added value, but it seems that using View is just 
too much trouble on anything else than Windows.

Send Carl a priority feedback ...

for windows it's very nice to have a taskbar icon and all, but when 
you run on server I want no view.. I have just command line on all 
servers anyways

so how do you interact with running servers?

browser interface?

I don't interact.. are there any interaction possible (I know for 
reload config and restart workers on windows)

My intent with providing a View kernel for Cheyenne was to use it 
as a general purpose image generation library. But as it fails to 
accomplish the most basic job of making decent thumbnails, and is 
quite painfull to run when the required dependencies are not satisfied, 
it's maybe better to get rid of it.

are there any interaction possible (I know for reload config and 
restart workers on windows)

 Similar interactions are possible on all platforms. For non-Windows 
 systems, use signals :
- reload config: kill -HUP <cheyenne-pid>
- reset workers: kill -USR1 <cheyenne-pid>
- quit: kill <cheyenne-pid> (or CTRL-C if running in foreground)

Graham: thanks, I'll try that...I thought that SDKs are supposed 
to be released with each new R2 version?

supposed to be ...

For thumbnails I have Imagick binding.. But I must test it with Cheyenne 
yet.

I just use call with imagemagick ... opn cheyenne

but windows though

CALL on a third party exe works, but that's not a solution able to 
scale high (not talking about the induced delay of creating and closing 
a process)

I've download latest REBOL in Xubuntu. Viewtop opened without problem 
but when I switched to console, nothing appeared. Because I deselected 
"show desktop on startup", now I cannot start REBOL at all. Any ideas?

At least I can run it from console. But I still wonder why it does 
not work from icon.

There is no console for linux...must use linux console.

if you want to see viewtop start rebol from console and type desktop

Once in viewtop try changing the settings back to "open vietwtop 
on startup"

I just wonder why clicking on the icon does not open rebol in linux 
console. but i have no problem running it directly from console

it's probably simply piping to whatever console it was started from. 
since the linux desktop has no console, you won't see one.

Hm, when I select "Install now" option, I get "segmentation fault"

RAMBO it

Done, #4751.

2.7.7?

I installed 2.76 on ubuntu no prob

yes, 2.7.7

Maybe it's fine on Ubuntu, I'm using Xubuntu as the computer is really 
really old.

might be missing a library file...check the list of required libs...find 
it somewhere on rebol site???

It's just the installation, everything else seems to work fine

ldd lists dependencies in console, no?

Well, first I need to get Cheyenne running, so I'll check the dependecies 
later :)

I also installed it on a server version of ubuntu with xfce loaded 
on top...iirc had to add some libs

You mentioned older computer. Is Xubuntu less resource hungry than 
Ubuntu?

Yes, the XFCE desktop should take less memory and CPU than Gnome.

And what about Kubuntu? (KDE)

big and hungry

like gnome

heh, it's running in 856x600, I see such resolution for the first 
time

What is running?