Although I have tried to test this patch as thoroughly as possible, a large percentage of the Neo/J code has changed so I think this patch will need a lot of testing.
In addition to the whatever testing that each tester usually does, I would like to look through all of the bugs in Bugzilla and see if any bugs that were fixed have not regressed. Would anyone be willing to help with this effort? If so, can you post a reply and let everyone know which range of bug numbers you will look at?
I am also interested to see if anyone sees the same performance improvements that I have seen with this patch. Let me know if you find any areas where performance has worsened.
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:44 pm Post subject: Re: NeoOffice/J Performance Patch Ready for Testing
FYI, even though NeoOffice/J Release Candidate Patch 9 is the equivalent of the final, you will need to download the final before installing the patch as the installer doesn't recognize the RC.
Just FYI, I'm not going to add this to the Release Notes page yet, as it's not a "normal" patch (and also because Patrick still lists Patch-0 as the latest patch, not Patch-1).
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
Just FYI, I'm not going to add this to the Release Notes page yet, as it's not a "normal" patch (and also because Patrick still lists Patch-0 as the latest patch, not Patch-1).
I think that is a good approach. After all, the "Patch-1" recovery patch is just a patch I cobbled together from a Neo/J 1.1 plus Patch-0 installation.
BTW, Performance Test Patch 1.1 has one other restriction: it will not install on Jaguar machines. Since Neo/J 1.2 will only support Panther and higher, I am doing builds on Panther and so there won't be any new Jaguar binaries.
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 9:52 pm Post subject: Re: NeoOffice/J Performance Patch Ready for Testing
pluby wrote:
In addition to the whatever testing that each tester usually does, I would like to look through all of the bugs in Bugzilla and see if any bugs that were fixed have not regressed. Would anyone be willing to help with this effort? If so, can you post a reply and let everyone know which range of bug numbers you will look at?
This query will get you all the bugs marked as Fixed (including the ones fixed in this patch--Resolved/Fixed--because BZ seems to always do an "or" when selecting a status and a resolution, instead of doing an "and"). There are only 13 pages of bugs @ 30 bugs a page.
Also--if Patrick's OK with a slight change in method--it might be useful to set up a page on the wiki to keep track of bugs checked. Some people might not be able to commit to a range of bugs but could check their own bugs, or check one or two a day, or there might be special sw/hw needs to check some bugs. That way we could get more people checking for regressions and still keep track of what bugs are checked (the only difficulty would be getting a nice, simple list of numbers out of Bugzilla from that query and into the wiki, so no bug falls through the cracks).
I can't commit to doing any sort of range right now, but I can look at my own bugs and then maybe one or two a day thereafter....
BTW, Bugzilla seems down atm
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
Joined: Feb 12, 2005 Posts: 607 Location: Australia
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:47 pm Post subject: Title Bar colour
Hi Patrick
Thanks for all your work on this. A first impression is that it is far quicker to load up. Am I right, that we lose the nice light-grey borders with this update? I tried running Brett's NeoIconer to remedy, but NeoIconer seems to break now.
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 11:15 pm Post subject: BUgzilla is down..
for some reason bugzilla doesn't seem to be working, so forgive me for posting here.
I ran the patch (os x 10.4.2, powerbook 667) and now get the following error when running from the Dock:
You cannot open the application "(null)" because it may be damaged or incomplete
and if I run it from /Applications I get:
You cannot open the application "NeoOfficeJ" because it may be damaged or incomplete.
Looking at the NeoOffice/J application's "more info", I see a 376.3 MB file, which seems to have lost its icon. I get a generic document. It's still called "NeoOfficeJ.app" though.
looking inside, I see the following files in the .app have a change date of today:
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:40 am Post subject: Re: Title Bar colour
aussie149 wrote:
Am I right, that we lose the nice light-grey borders with this update?
System highlight color, which came along with that, is also missing. I know there's a bug filed for implementing that stuff; I assume if we know something's regressed, we should re-open the old bug and note it's regressed?
Bug 692 reopened with such a note. If that's not what we should do, let me know
BTW, first startup post-patch seemed much slower to me, but in limited tests the UI feels more responsive.
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:55 am Post subject: Re: Title Bar colour
sardisson wrote:
BTW, first startup post-patch seemed much slower to me, but in limited tests the UI feels more responsive.
I think the Cocoa font iteration is noticeably slower than the Carbon iteration was (I have a large number of fonts, a couple hundred probably).
However, I can also notice the reduced memory reqs...Neo/J feels much "lighter" (as well as snappier)
Filed half-a-dozen or so bugs...all my various sample documents from various bugs still work, so no regressions there I should have been asleep a couple of hours ago, so...good night all!
Really superb work, Patrick! It's like Neo/J on steroids, or something like that without the negative connotation of cheating
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
- the startup is a little slower (42 sec. vs 35 sec. after a computer reboot)
- with 10.3.5 all icons was garbage. I download a java update from apple site and now all is working fine.
- it ask less ram
- we lost the lighter gray!
- if I search something and neo do not find nothing a window tell me nothing is founded. I press return to close the window and it is still open. I have to use the mouse to select the OK button, or the window before press return.
- some fonts makes different thing than before: a database tabel using a particolar font loses the euro symbol.
- well. the general feedback is... strange! Some things seems to be faster, in other way the draw operation seems to be under your eyes, so sometimes I'm asking myself if it is faster or simple neo is showing me all drawing operation... it is hard to explain.
here and there is seems to flick...
Ok, I'll use it a lot in this days, so I can make a better report
Joined: Feb 03, 2004 Posts: 241 Location: Scotland
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2005 4:26 am Post subject:
Have been using the patched Neo/J this morning. About 43 sec to start up (as opposed to @ 30 sec). By disabling most fonts I got this down to 35 sec. "Warm" start-up takes about 11 sec (as opposed to @ 14). The disabling of fonts has no noticeable effect on a warm start-up. Opening of window from dock or menu bar (while Neo/J is running) more or less instantaneous (much snappier). Opening up large presentations appears to be faster.
A restart of the system is now cancelled when Neo/J is running. A system message is displayed: The application NeoOffice cancelled restart. I believe that this was not the case before (?).
Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:54 am Post subject: Re: BUgzilla is down..
Anonymous wrote:
the files in the "classes" directory were new too. I included the above in case anything looked the wrong size or something....
It is not surprising that all of the files are as of today. The Neo/J installer touches each file at the end of the install to force the OS to reload each of the binaries.
From your list, I noticed that you are missing many files that are a part of the standard Neo/J install. In particular, none of the softlinks are there. I think you are going to need to reinstall Neo/J 1.1 to clean up your corrupted installation.
I have done some test today comparing the old neooffice to the new one. Except one test (switching from a control properties to another in a form) the old neooffice is still faster that the new one, and many test shows there is no speed difference at all.
I'd like to share my test with other users, but the office's adsl modem is dead today and I have not the results here at home.
If someone else want to lose his time comparing the neooffice/j java 1.3 with the new one I have interest in it.
All times are GMT - 7 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26Next
Page 1 of 26
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
