IS it possible to require both ECM-F from v5 server and LL from v4 server working together?

Luigi

[QUOTE=ET_;125547]IS it possible to require both ECM-F from v5 server and LL from v4 server working together?[/QUOTE]

No. You get to work with one server or the other.

[QUOTE=Prime95;125550]No. You get to work with one server or the other.[/QUOTE]

OK, no problem, thanks :smile:

Luigi

The v5 server don't accept ComputerIDs containing a "." character, but mprime does. The ID works fine with the v4 server. The error message is a bit misleading as well. It works fine if I change the "." to a "_".

On my wish-list: An option to make ComputerID become the computer hostname, or what it is called in DNS.

[code]
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] Updating computer information on the server
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] URL: http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=11eee5d1495eed75c9f3c01544e38a99&hg=279fd148b01f865b2f30c7d70db4e030&wg=&a=Linux64,Prime95,v25.6,build+6&c=AMD+Athlon(tm)+64+X2+Dual+Core+Processor+4800%2B&f=RDTSC,CMOV,Prefetch,3DNow!,MMX,SSE,SSE2&L1=64&L2=512&np=2&hp=1&m=1884&s=997&h=24&r=1000&u=S00113&cn=test.id&ss=63492&sh=B57D1E4493A5DBAF3F3930440F3DD0E8
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] pnErrorResult=7
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] pnErrorDetail=parameter cn: Invalid character: '' in 'test.id'
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] ==END==
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55]
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] PrimeNet error 7: Invalid parameter
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] parameter cn: Invalid character: '' in 'test.id'
[Comm thread Feb 18 10:55] Visit http://mersenneforum.org for help.
[/code]

[QUOTE=S00113;126040]The v5 server don't accept ComputerIDs containing a "." character, but mprime does. The ID works fine with the v4 server. The error message is a bit misleading as well. It works fine if I change the "." to a "_".
[/QUOTE]

This would be definitely a problem for the user "."

[QUOTE=Andi47;126054]This would be definitely a problem for the user "."[/QUOTE]

I assume you are joking. The "." is the result of an error, the account is comprised of a lot of anonymous accounts.

[quote=tha;126078]I assume you are joking. The "." is the result of an error, the account is comprised of a lot of anonymous accounts.[/quote]
I remember reading somewhere on this forum once that someone called "Dandot Moore" headed up that account--which would explain a lot about the name. :wink: Thus, it would appear to be an intentional choice, not an error.

User "." is a v4 error. Scott just fixed the v5 server to allow "." in computer names.

I just noticed I've been assigned M46000987 for double-checking, but this computer was the same one that did the original LL (finished 26jan2008). Isn't the idea of double-checking both to run the test again, but specifically on different hardware?

James, the test would eventually have to be redone - by Brian Beesley - as George only asks for two runs with different shifts. The majority of tests are done on x86 machines so no, different hardware requirements do not apply. they only apply for verifying primes.

Still, I would recommend releasing the exponent for someone else to test.

[quote=garo;126341]James, the test would eventually have to be redone - by Brian Beesley - as George only asks for two runs with different shifts. The majority of tests are done on x86 machines so no, different hardware requirements do not apply. they only apply for verifying primes.

Still, I would recommend releasing the exponent for someone else to test.[/quote]
I think the "shifting" is a pretty good guarantee, worthy of
the word "proof". Why the prompt doublecheck?