Hello Stephen, first off yeah I just edited a bit the cut & paste.
Secondly I knew I was running 5.0 license so why am I getting that
error when I try to run XSI 5.o ???
Christopher
Saturday, May 13, 2006, 12:22:13 PM, you wrote:
> Hi Christopher.
> Yes, but what is the value of _SPM_HOST?
> Tell us.
> Open the Softimage\XSI_5.1\Application\bin\setenv.bat file, find the line that contains the text
> set _SPM_HOST=
> and then tell me what, if anything, is on the right-hand side of the equal (=) sign.
> Until you actually tell me or somebody else, we cannot discount the
> possibility that your _SPM_HOST variable is incorrectly set.
> And...
> The excerpt from List Keys that you posted below shows that the license is for version 5.0.
> I see "5.0", not "4.2", so you have a 5.0 license installed.
> Though I don't know why there's an "x" for "lic#". Did you do that
> (I mean, did you edit the text you copied and pasted from the List Keys output in Lictools)?
> Steve
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Chris
> Sent: May 13, 2006 10:34 AM
> To: Stephen Blair
> Subject: Re[10]: 1 licence for two different versions
> Hello Stephen, this is what I get the info from "localhost" as you
> can see it shows licence for 5.o BUT i'm still getting the plain simple
> error: there is no interactive licence server. I appreciate
> everyones help but after all the help i've gotten i've come to a
> idea\conclusion. It seems that the 4.2 licence is not allowing the
> 5.0 to run (did someone mention this to me already !?!?) And I have
> no clue after all the help and editing i'ved done why 5 can't just
> load and that error message go away.
> Christopher
> PM-daemon on 'localhost(ani)':
> Licenses from SOFTIMAGE:
> License name version lic# used beg_date end_date cpu# type
> 5.0 x 0 FL
> See when I do a local host
> Saturday, May 13, 2006, 9:40:25 AM, you wrote:
>> No, he means you don't have to do anything to the setenv.bat file.
>> But you should at least look at the 5.1 setenv.bat and verify that
>> _SPM_HOST is not set to some bogus value. It happens, more often than you might think.
>> Steve
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
>> Behalf Of Chris
>> Sent: May 13, 2006 8:59 AM
>> To: kim aldis
>> Subject: Re[8]: 1 licence for two different versions
>> Hi, Kim so your saying I don't have to do nothing in the licence files
>> ? I know that 5.0 licence is installed because taking a look at the
>> licence keys there is no mention of 4.2 just 5.0 listing.
>> And what I'm seeing I know has got to be right, unless a big unless
>> there is something i'm mis-understanding when I read the licence keys.
>> Christopher
>> Friday, May 12, 2006, 12:52:27 PM, you wrote:
>>> If you're running xsi local to the spm server you don't need anything
>>> in there. In absence it assumes localhost.
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
>>>> [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Bernard Lebel
>>>> Sent: 12-May-2006 17:41
>>>> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
>>>> Subject: Re: Re[6]: 1 licence for two different versions
>>>>
>>>> and do *not* put the <> characters! This is a programming notation
>>>> to indicate "a value that has to be filled"!!
>>>>
>>>> You can also put your computer's IP address:
>>>>
>>>> set _SPM_HOST=192.168.1.10 (just an example)
>>>>
>>>> You also simply put "localhost", if the SPM is on the same computer
>>>> as the one running XSI:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> set _SPM_HOST=localhost
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Bernard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/12/06, Stephen Blair <Stephen_Blair(at)softimage.com> wrote:
>>>> > Hi Christopher
>>>> >
>>>> > Open setenv.bat in a text editor.
>>>> > Find this line:
>>>> >
>>>> > rem License servers specified from the setup
>>>> >
>>>> > And then verify that the very next line looks like this:
>>>> >
>>>> > set _SPM_HOST=<hostname>
>>>> >
>>>> > where <hostname> is the name of the computer where you
>>>> installed the SPM license server .
>>>> >
>>>> > Steve
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>>> > From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
>>>> > Behalf Of Chris
>>>> > Sent: May 12, 2006 12:00 PM
>>>> > To: Wayne Williams
>>>> > Subject: Re[6]: 1 licence for two different versions
>>>> >
>>>> > Hello Wayne, where in that area that says SPM_HOST?
>>>> >
>>>> > Christopher
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Friday, May 12, 2006, 11:12:43 AM, you wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Did you input your hostname?
>>>> >
>>>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>>>> > > From: "Chris" <walksfar(at)netscape.ca>
>>>> > > To: "kim aldis" <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
>>>> > > Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 10:51 AM
>>>> > > Subject: Re[4]: 1 licence for two different versions
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > >> Hello kim, well i'm going to recheck everything today. I even
>>>> > >> botched up a project I was workin on now only to have to redo
>>>> > >> it again. So you say that it should work if 4.2 is working,
>>>> > >> what sorta things should I look for in the setenv files of the two?
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Christopher
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Friday, May 12, 2006, 2:33:13 AM, you wrote:
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> > I doubt it. You can get a license for 4.2 so the
>>>> licensing is working.
>>>> > > Did
>>>> > >> > you compare spm variables in both setenv files?
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> > >> >> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
>>>> > >> >> [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Chris
>>>> > >> >> Sent: 12-May-2006 00:37
>>>> > >> >> To: kim aldis
>>>> > >> >> Subject: Re[2]: 1 licence for two different versions
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> Hello kim, well it's 4.2 that is running and version
>>>> 5.0 that is
>>>> > >> >> not running. I did a recheck and I get a error with
>>>> COM ports,
>>>> > >> >> could it be COM ports conflicting ???
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> Christopher
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> Thursday, May 11, 2006, 5:22:09 AM, you wrote:
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> > There's only so many permutations here;
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> > 1. you can't see the license server
>>>> > >> >> > since one version gets a license, this is
>>>> unlikely 2.
>>>> > >> >> > you don't have the correct licens
>>>> > >> >> > I can't remember if you said 4.2 or 5 wouldn't run
>>>> > >> >> but if it's
>>>> > >> >> > 5 then you may not have installed the license for 5. if
>>>> > >> >> > you
>>>> > >> >> can run 5
>>>> > >> >> > but not
>>>> > >> >> > 4.2 then this can't be the case.
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> > 3. you've run out of licenses for one version. If
>>>> this is the
>>>> > >> >> > case then somewhere, somehow, you're running an xsi and
>>>> > >> >> > you
>>>> > >> >> don't know it.
>>>> > >> >> > Check the task manager process list for xsi.exe or
>>>> > >> >> xsibatch.exe, kill
>>>> > >> >> > them if they're there. Double check that another machine
>>>> > >> >> isn't pulling licenses.
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> > That should be it.
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> > >> >> >> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
>>>> > >> >> >> [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Tim
>>>> > >> >> >> Leydecker
>>>> > >> >> >> Sent: 11-May-2006 09:32
>>>> > >> >> >> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
>>>> > >> >> >> Subject: Re: 1 licence for two different versions
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> Hi Chris (Marshall),
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> the confusion (for me) derived from the difference
>>>> > >> >> >> between SPM and FlexLm, e.g. using FLexLm with Maya 6.01
>>>> > >> >> >> has the advantage
>>>> > >> >> of letting
>>>> > >> >> >> you run an older (4.5 here) *.lic file merged with the
>>>> > >> >> >> *upgrade* license file of Maya 6.01, e.g.
>>>> > >> >> >> there is no built in limitation for interactive
>>>> licenses, if
>>>> > >> >> >> you upgrade, you can run both simultaneously
>>>> > >> >> >> (nodelocked/floating), according to the amount of
>>>> > >> >> >> licenses you have. One 4.5 and one 6.x, nodelocked (to a
>>>> specific MAC
>>>> > >> >> >> adress) or floating.
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> I had thought this to be the same with XSI/SPM, ignoring
>>>> > >> >> the explicit
>>>> > >> >> >> use of *interactive* as a licensing token type...
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> I still can´t test wether I *could* run XSI 4.2/5.1
>>>> > >> >> >> simultaneously from 1 upgraded license as I
>>>> haven´t upgraded
>>>> > >> >> >> yet. That´s all:-)
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> Cheers
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> tim
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> > >> >> >> From: "Chris Marshall" <chris(at)eclipsecreative.co.uk>
>>>> > >> >> >> To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
>>>> > >> >> >> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 1:41 PM
>>>> > >> >> >> Subject: Re: 1 licence for two different versions
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> > If you've payed to upgrade to 5, you've still only got
>>>> > >> >> >> > a
>>>> > >> >> >> license to run 1 XSI, no
>>>> > >> >> >> > matter which version that is.
>>>> > >> >> >> > If you bought a brand new copy of 5, then
>>>> clearly you could
>>>> > >> >> >> still run one 4.2 and
>>>> > >> >> >> > also your new version 5 at the same time.
>>>> > >> >> >> > Personally, I'm not sure where the confusion is?
>>>> > >> >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> >> > Tim Leydecker wrote:
>>>> > >> >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> >> >> (this isn´t my thread, it´s Chris´)
>>>> > >> >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> >> Thanks for the details about the consequences of the
>>>> > >> >> >> licensing scheme,
>>>> > >> >> >> >> I had assumed SPM and FlexLM to work identical, e.g. I
>>>> > >> >> could run
>>>> > >> >> >> >> two 4.5 Maya licenses here using one 4.5 and 6.0 if my
>>>> > >> >> >> licenses wouldn´t
>>>> > >> >> >> >> be nodelocked anyway but floating :-)
>>>> > >> >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> >> Good to know this wouldn´t work with XSI, e.g.you had
>>>> > >> >> upgraded a
>>>> > >> >> >> >> licensefile and explicitely get one interactive
>>>> > >> >> >> >> license
>>>> > >> >> >> granted in that.
>>>> > >> >> >> >> Counting per machine but made to block different
>>>> > >> >> >> >> builds
>>>> > >> >> to run in
>>>> > >> >> >> >> a simultaneous session from one interactive license.
>>>> > >> >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> >> This isn´t ideal as it would obviously be desireable
>>>> > >> >> >> >> to
>>>> > >> >> >> have both builds
>>>> > >> >> >> >> open when transfering things from old>new for fixing
>>>> > >> >> >> >> inconveniences introduced through new functionality or
>>>> > >> >> changed featuresets.
>>>> > >> >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> >> tim
>>>> > >> >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> >> P.S: I´d find it building customer relationship to
>>>> > >> >> >> >> allow
>>>> > >> >> >> *build up* of
>>>> > >> >> >> >> licenses but I can understand it would be commercially
>>>> > >> >> stressing...
>>>> > >> >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "kim aldis"
>>>> > >> >> >> >> <kim(at)cg-soup.com>
>>>> > >> >> >> >> To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
>>>> > >> >> >> >> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 12:07 PM
>>>> > >> >> >> >> Subject: RE: 1 licence for two different versions
>>>> > >> >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> The rules are that one user/machine combination only
>>>> > >> >> >> takes one token, no
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> matter how many instances of xsi you use. However, it
>>>> > >> >> >> does seem that the
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> rule doesn't cross version boundaries and running 5.1
>>>> > >> >> >> alongside 4.2 won't
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> work if you have a single token. With that caveat,
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> old
>>>> > >> >> >> versions of xsi will
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> run from newer tokens, so 4.2 will run from a 5.1
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> token
>>>> > >> >> >> provided 5.1 isn't
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> running. Which is annoying.
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> Except on linux where a second xsi will crash the
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> prior
>>>> > >> >> >> version. That's a
>>>> > >> >> >> >>> bug, though.
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Sandy E.
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> Sutherland
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> Sent: 10-May-2006 10:49
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> Subject: RE: 1 licence for two different versions
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>>
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> Don't know about this - If you BOUGHT 4.2 and then
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> BOUGHT
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> 5.01 - then you can get Softimage to generate
>>>> you a key
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> with both in - but if you bought 4.2 and
>>>> UPGRADED it to
>>>> > >> >> 5.01 - then
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> you can run only 1 seat at a time - unless of course
>>>> > >> >> this is on
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> 1 machine - where you should be able to run 2 or
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> more
>>>> > >> >> XSI at the
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> same time - THIS IS ON THE SAME MACHINE!!!!
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> I am presuming this, as I do not run 2 XSIs
>>>> at the same
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> time
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> - do not work that way!!
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>>
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> S.
>>>> > >> >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> >> > ---
>>>> > >> >> >> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
>>>> > >> >> >> following text in body:
>>>> > >> >> >> > unsubscribe xsi
>>>> > >> >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> ---
>>>> > >> >> >> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
>>>> > >> >> following text in
>>>> > >> >> >> body:
>>>> > >> >> >> unsubscribe xsi
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> > ---
>>>> > >> >> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
>>>> > >> >> following text in body:
>>>> > >> >> > unsubscribe xsi
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> --
>>>> > >> >> Best regards,
>>>> > >> >> Chris mailto:walksfar(at)netscape.ca
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> ---
>>>> > >> >> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following
>>>> > >> >> text in body:
>>>> > >> >> unsubscribe xsi
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> > ---
>>>> > >> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
>>>> following text
>>>> > >> > in
>>>> > > body:
>>>> > >> > unsubscribe xsi
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> --
>>>> > >> Best regards,
>>>> > >> Chris mailto:walksfar(at)netscape.ca
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> ---
>>>> > >> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
>>>> following text in body:
>>>> > >> unsubscribe xsi
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > > ---
>>>> > > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
>>>> following text in body:
>>>> > > unsubscribe xsi
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Best regards,
>>>> > Chris mailto:walksfar(at)netscape.ca
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > ---
>>>> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
>>>> following text in body:
>>>> > unsubscribe xsi
>>>> >
>>>> > ---
>>>> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
>>>> following text in body:
>>>> > unsubscribe xsi
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in
>>>> body:
>>>> unsubscribe xsi
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---
>>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>>> unsubscribe xsi
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Chris mailto:walksfar(at)netscape.ca
>> ---
>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>> unsubscribe xsi
>> ---
>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>> unsubscribe xsi
> --
> Best regards,
> Chris mailto:walksfar(at)netscape.ca
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi
--
Best regards,
Chris mailto:walksfar(at)netscape.ca
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
