Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
changed to an enhancement
Original comment by nawglan
on 9 Aug 2008 at 1:16
code_swarm runs great on my own machine, but I've got a lot of visualizations
I'd
like to make, and I'd like to offload the work onto a more powerful server.
Here's the error that I get when running it on a headless server:
>> ~/code_swarm $ ant run
>> Buildfile: build.xml
>>
>> init:
>> [echo] Running INIT
>>
>> build:
>> [echo] Running BUILD
>>
>> jar:
>> [echo] Running JAR
>>
>> run:
>> [echo] Running code_swarm
>> [java] Exception in thread "main"
java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError
>> [java] Caused by: java.awt.HeadlessException:
>> [java] No X11 DISPLAY variable was set, but this program performed an
operation which requires it.
>> [java] at
sun.awt.HeadlessToolkit.getMenuShortcutKeyMask(HeadlessToolkit.java:199)
>> [java] at processing.core.PApplet.<clinit>(PApplet.java:202)
>> [java] Java Result: 1
I tried adding -Djava.awt.headless=true to the java invocation in run.sh with
the
same result.
Original comment by ric...@gmail.com
on 13 Aug 2008 at 1:38
This is a great feature that will make rendering those large projects less of a
headache. I don't know how coupled we are right now with the display. I'm
reading
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2SE/Desktop/headless/ right
now to
see what we can do about it.
Original comment by michael....@gmail.com
on 17 Aug 2008 at 1:10
Yeap I vote for this too.
Original comment by felipe.contreras
on 30 Aug 2008 at 11:30
This feature would interest me as well.
Original comment by dlidstrom
on 19 Sep 2008 at 11:07
Any success or news on that? I'd be definitely leaving these rendering tasks to
a low
traffic server.
Original comment by asistenc...@gmail.com
on 11 Jan 2009 at 2:40
Just my 2c, hopefully it can make some other person's research shorter than
mine.
Rather than start monkeying around in the source code (or while I'm getting set
for
it :P) I've managed to successfully get code_swarm in a headless-alike rendering
task, via Xvfb (a fake X11 for headless boxes):
sudo apt-get install xfvb
#At this stage check that you have xauth, xbase-clients, fixed fonts and such..
#if everytthing's fine running 'Xvfb :0 -screen 0 1024x768x16 &' shouldn't
throw any
# error.
# Then you could run code_swarm in ~headless mode with:
xvfb-run -n 0 -a -w 10 ./run.sh data/my_project.config &
Looking at some other Java projects that were originally conceived as applets
and
were later tried as web services, I had the feeling that making all these
linux/Xwindow-specific details clear here is a good idea. Sorry if it looks
offtopic
or something.
While my renders ends, I'd get my hands into the Processing thing and see
what's the
problem with awt.headless.
Best regards.
Original comment by asistenc...@gmail.com
on 12 Jan 2009 at 2:45
I vote for it too.
(sorry, long time not speaking here)
Original comment by jp.caru...@gmail.com
on 4 Mar 2009 at 4:47
I have also been reading up on this. The latest topic about "headless" mode and
the
Processing libraries is not promising (Reply #8 - Nov 10th, 2007
http://processing.org/discourse/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1193317878). They are
suggesting
to incorporate PJA with Processing but it looks as though there has been no
activity
on this topic in a long time. Maybe there is another Java solution for writing
graphics and we can phase out the Processing library alltogether? Perhaps PJA
http://www.eteks.com/pja/en/ could replace it. I do not have a great knowledge
of
Processing so I can not comment any further.
Original comment by tj.pi...@gmail.com
on 19 Apr 2009 at 3:18
A headless version would be helpful for me too.
I got the command
xvfb-run -n 0 -a -w 10 ./run.sh data/my_project.config
to work for me but just thinking of all those wasted cycles rendering to a
buffer
that is ignored. A proper headless version would be greatly appreciated.
Original comment by Slick...@gmail.com
on 4 Jun 2010 at 12:06
Adding to my earlier comment using xvfb causes the program to run really REALLY
slow.
It's also only using one of the four cores that my processor has it's been
running
for 70 hours and only produced 3890 frames (640x480). this should really be
fixed in
the application itself.
Original comment by Slick...@gmail.com
on 7 Jun 2010 at 11:47
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
arnout.engelen
on 9 Aug 2008 at 12:36