thats the install program for RAH Beta 5.76 that is the new RAH client.
Boinc is the application, but 5.76 also needs internet access to report and get work units. If there is something RAH or BOINC that needs to access the internet, let it.

Hi!

My firewall (Zonealarm) has reported rosetta_beta_5.76_windows_intelx86.exe as trying to access the internet.

Why is it doing this?

Isn't reporting, etc. carried out by the BOINC application rather than the Rosetta .exe?

This may be a really stupid question! :)

Unless something has changed recently that I am aware of... splodger's expectation is correct. BOINC does all the normal uploading and downloading of work, not the Rosetta program. However, if the Rosetta debugger encounters an error condition, it attempts to gather additional data and report it directly back to the project. This occurs directly from the Rosetta application you are currently running.

This is what Stevea is pointing out. Because each new release then requires a new application to be allowed in your firewall (if you wish to do so). But using the same name as suggested isn't how BOINC works. And would not allow the project the flexibility to run two versions of work at the same time, as they are presently doing.

Steve, are you seeing cases where more then just debug data is being reported in this way? Perhaps it would be best for you to simply have your firewall deny access to the next 10 version numbers, or any program in the Rosetta project folder, and not report the debug data. Then at least your machine wouldn't be sitting idle awaiting your permission for the application to use the internet. All your work results (successful or otherwise) are reported by BOINC, so doing this should only impact reporting of such debug data, which should be very rare anyway.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Hi! I'm using Rosetta Beta 5.76 to crunch LFAB__BOINC_TOP5CHEAT_JUMPRELAX_BARCODE-LFAB_-_1947_783_0 on a Pentium IV 2.2GHz. The %done is 100%, and the process is running for 33h so far - the task doesn't end. I used the 'show graphics' and nothing moves; the task displays the word 'initializing' and a percentual near 33%. Should I leave this task alone, processing 'til the end of the world?

In another machine (a Pentium IV 2.0GHz), another similar task (TOP5CHEAT) initializes, runs for 20 seconds, and then freezes. This task I cancelled by myself. Is there any question about 'TOP5CHEAT' tasks running on Beta 5.76?

Thanks in advice,

Tulio L.

In order to help...

Hi! I'm using Rosetta Beta 5.76 to crunch LFAB__BOINC_TOP5CHEAT_JUMPRELAX_BARCODE-LFAB_-_1947_783_0 on a Pentium IV 2.2GHz. The %done is 100%, and the process is running for 33h so far - the task doesn't end. I used the 'show graphics' and nothing moves; the task displays the word 'initializing' and a percentual near 33%. Should I leave this task alone, processing 'til the end of the world?

Link to the workunit and result (none, still in progress):
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=99959591

In another machine (a Pentium IV 2.0GHz), another similar task (TOP5CHEAT) initializes, runs for 20 seconds, and then freezes. This task I cancelled by myself. Is there any question about 'TOP5CHEAT' tasks running on Beta 5.76?

Link to the workunit and result (no result, cancelled):
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=99959755

I've noticed that in this workunit the graphics looked like they had some holes in them. See screenshot:


(click to enlarge)

Is this normal? Or is this a bug? I've never noticed this before, only in this particular workunit.

Edit: Never mind, found the answer in this thread. Sorry. :-)

---

I've been getting this error on all 5 PCs[1073741819(0xC0000005)], More WUs have succeeded than errored out of course, Some PCs have updated graphics drivers(PC1 & PC2), Some don't(PC3-5), Some are overclocked to the max(PC2, PC4 & PC5), One is overclocked less(PC1) and One is at stock speed(PC3), 4 use XP x64 and a Native x64 Boinc Client(Crunch3r's Boinc 5.9.0.64, over Boinc 5.9.11 for XP x64) and 1 uses XP Pro and a Native x32 Boinc Client(Boinc 5.9.11 for XP Pro/2000), All Boincs are as updated as I feel is needed at present and the systems worked fine under Seti, I can only guess that since all 5 are using the same 32bit Beta Rosetta application namely:

rosetta@home rosetta_beta version 576

That It might be related to 5.76 somehow and I'm no scientist or programmer, Just a guy who runs PCs that I built Myself(Networked too, Self taught on the Networking, 27 years of computer usage and two computer courses in the early 80's in Basic and Computers[So I know the inner workings of a computer and understand the terms too, But then I've used 7 different OSes since then in 4 different types of computers up to the present time]). But then I'm pretty comfortable with computers and always have been for some reason.

On top of that I'm down to 3 WUs on PC1(1:20:00 almost)[XP x64],
PC2 has about 1.5 days[XP Pro],
PC3 has a little over 17 hours of work[XP x64],
PC4 has about 1.5 days and[XP x64],
PC5 has about 3.5 days[XP x64].

Is there anyway I can get an earlier version of 5.76 or is this less error prone than the earlier versions of the app or am I stuck with this until a newer version comes out?

Oh and I sweep My PCs for adware/spyware/malware and keep My AV software upto date.

The PCs stay pretty cool too, 4 use Vigor Monsoon II cpu coolers and 1 uses an XP120 & a 120mm cpu fan(PC2).

---

Bad'OL MJSJ's PC Specs

Batman, no you cannot control the Rosetta version that runs. This is determined by the project when you download work.

Here is a link to some BOINC info. on that error code 0xC0000005. One of the potential issues listed in memory. Have you run a memory test on these machines for an extended period of time? There are a number of other issues listed there which you might check.

I don't know why, but they neglect to mention the possibility that the project does have a bug. However, as you suggested, error rates have been getting lower with each new Rosetta release.

Am I correct to presume you saw fewer, if any, such errors on prior versions of Rosetta? Is there any commonality to the task names that are failing? Do you use the BOINC screensaver on these machines?

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Batman, no you cannot control the Rosetta version that runs. This is determined by the project when you download work.

Here is a link to some BOINC info. on that error code 0xC0000005. One of the potential issues listed in memory. Have you run a memory test on these machines for an extended period of time? There are a number of other issues listed there which you might check.

I don't know why, but they neglect to mention the possibility that the project does have a bug. However, as you suggested, error rates have been getting lower with each new Rosetta release.

Am I correct to presume you saw fewer, if any, such errors on prior versions of Rosetta? Is there any commonality to the task names that are failing? Do you use the BOINC screensaver on these machines?

Ok, That's settled, Too bad there isn't an XP x64 rosetta app though.

All the PCs use different types of ram(DDR2, DDR, RegDDR), PC3 qualifies as a server as It uses registered ram and has dual cpus, Under Seti I had no problems any of the PCs.

I wonder what that bug is, Too bad I can't spray It with RAID. ;)

I've only noted what I've read and some of what My own PCs did a while back, Of course I don't know what the version number is that I crunched under back then. Mo idea. Nope No screen saver, I Don't use any screen saver on any of the PCs I own and use and the Monitor is an LCD, So why would I need to?

---

Bad'OL MJSJ's PC Specs

Odd. "Show Computers" only shows 3 PCs active on your account since May and none of the current results show any with errors. All completed results show as successful. Where are these errors you're reporting?

I've been getting this error on all 5 PCs[1073741819(0xC0000005)], More WUs have succeeded than errored out of course, Some PCs have updated graphics drivers(PC1 & PC2), Some don't(PC3-5), Some are overclocked to the max(PC2, PC4 & PC5), One is overclocked less(PC1) and One is at stock speed(PC3), 4 use XP x64 and a Native x64 Boinc Client(Crunch3r's Boinc 5.9.0.64, over Boinc 5.9.11 for XP x64) and 1 uses XP Pro and a Native x32 Boinc Client(Boinc 5.9.11 for XP Pro/2000), All Boincs are as updated as I feel is needed at present and the systems worked fine under Seti, I can only guess that since all 5 are using the same 32bit Beta Rosetta application namely:

rosetta@home rosetta_beta version 576

That It might be related to 5.76 somehow and I'm no scientist or programmer, Just a guy who runs PCs that I built Myself(Networked too, Self taught on the Networking, 27 years of computer usage and two computer courses in the early 80's in Basic and Computers[So I know the inner workings of a computer and understand the terms too, But then I've used 7 different OSes since then in 4 different types of computers up to the present time]). But then I'm pretty comfortable with computers and always have been for some reason.

On top of that I'm down to 3 WUs on PC1(1:20:00 almost)[XP x64],
PC2 has about 1.5 days[XP Pro],
PC3 has a little over 17 hours of work[XP x64],
PC4 has about 1.5 days and[XP x64],
PC5 has about 3.5 days[XP x64].

Is there anyway I can get an earlier version of 5.76 or is this less error prone than the earlier versions of the app or am I stuck with this until a newer version comes out?

Oh and I sweep My PCs for adware/spyware/malware and keep My AV software upto date.

The PCs stay pretty cool too, 4 use Vigor Monsoon II cpu coolers and 1 uses an XP120 & a 120mm cpu fan(PC2).

---

Nemesis n. A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent.

Odd. "Show Computers" only shows 3 PCs active on your account since May and none of the current results show any with errors. All completed results show as successful. Where are these errors you're reporting?

I've been getting this error on all 5 PCs[1073741819(0xC0000005)], More WUs have succeeded than errored out of course, Some PCs have updated graphics drivers(PC1 & PC2), Some don't(PC3-5), Some are overclocked to the max(PC2, PC4 & PC5), One is overclocked less(PC1) and One is at stock speed(PC3), 4 use XP x64 and a Native x64 Boinc Client(Crunch3r's Boinc 5.9.0.64, over Boinc 5.9.11 for XP x64) and 1 uses XP Pro and a Native x32 Boinc Client(Boinc 5.9.11 for XP Pro/2000), All Boincs are as updated as I feel is needed at present and the systems worked fine under Seti, I can only guess that since all 5 are using the same 32bit Beta Rosetta application namely:

rosetta@home rosetta_beta version 576

That It might be related to 5.76 somehow and I'm no scientist or programmer, Just a guy who runs PCs that I built Myself(Networked too, Self taught on the Networking, 27 years of computer usage and two computer courses in the early 80's in Basic and Computers[So I know the inner workings of a computer and understand the terms too, But then I've used 7 different OSes since then in 4 different types of computers up to the present time]). But then I'm pretty comfortable with computers and always have been for some reason.

On top of that I'm down to 3 WUs on PC1(1:20:00 almost)[XP x64],
PC2 has about 1.5 days[XP Pro],
PC3 has a little over 17 hours of work[XP x64],
PC4 has about 1.5 days and[XP x64],
PC5 has about 3.5 days[XP x64].

Is there anyway I can get an earlier version of 5.76 or is this less error prone than the earlier versions of the app or am I stuck with this until a newer version comes out?

Oh and I sweep My PCs for adware/spyware/malware and keep My AV software upto date.

The PCs stay pretty cool too, 4 use Vigor Monsoon II cpu coolers and 1 uses an XP120 & a 120mm cpu fan(PC2).

That's cause, Not too long after that I'd put the 3 PCs on "the Swordfish" account here in Rosetta and added 2 more PCs That I'd tried swapping psus(PC4 & PC5), That didn't work so I had to reswap the psus and now the two PCs work again, Even If I had to do a warm boot on PC4(PC5 doesn't require a warm boot), Only the psus, cpus, ram & optical drives vary between the two PCs, Even If they do run at the same speed. :D (50C & 35C respectively[cpu temps]).

---

Bad'OL MJSJ's PC Specs