BoincTasks unable to show tasks in Project tab with version 0.00

Started by Keith Myers, February 27, 2023, 08:55:38 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Keith Myers

 :-[
Just updated to a an anonymous application for asteroids period_search and discovered now that BoincTasks can't see the tasks ready to start and onboard every host in the Projects tab.

The Projects view shows 0 tasks for the Asteroids project.

Before I upgraded to the anonymous app and was running the stock application 1.17, all the Asteroids period_search tasks were shown.

However in the Tasks tab, all the tasks onboard running and ready to run are shown.

The only change was to the period_search application from version 1.17 to version 0.00

So a small bug in how BT enumerates tasks in the Projects tab view.

Could you please fix the Projects view so that version numbering like 0.00 is accepted.


Keith Myers


Keith Myers

Fred, are you reading the forums at all?  No response yet to this bug in BoincTasks.

fred

I know, too busy right now, I added it to my list to do. It will take a while before I will be able to pick this up.

fred


fred

When I use 0.00 as a version number everthing works as expected, so that's not it.

Keith Myers

Quote from: fred on May 05, 2023, 02:07:59 PMI checked the Application page https://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/apps.php
There is no 0.00 app, that I can find to check.
Because my Team uses a custom app via app_info.xml and the app version is not specified.

<app_version>
    <app_name>period_search</app_name>
    <platform>x86_64-pc-linux-gnu</platform>
    <avg_ncpus>0.010000</avg_ncpus>
    <plan_class>cuda1200_linux</plan_class>
    <api_version>7.17.0</api_version>
    <file_ref>
        <file_name>AST_period_search_BOINC_cuda12000_v4</file_name>
        <main_program/>
    </file_ref>
    <coproc>
        <type>NVIDIA</type>
        <count>1.000000</count>
    </coproc>
    <dont_throttle/>
</app_version>

fred


fred

It's almost impossible to resolve.
Just a dumb question, why don't you assign a dummy version number that is > 0 instead of none that results in 0