Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 15:53:22 09/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 30, 2000 at 17:18:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On September 30, 2000 at 01:28:34, Pete Galati wrote: > >>On September 29, 2000 at 22:42:15, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On September 29, 2000 at 18:44:13, Pete Galati wrote: >>> >>>>On September 29, 2000 at 17:48:15, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 29, 2000 at 17:13:30, ERIQ wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I for one would like to see either chess tiger II, rebel 11, or junior 6 for >>>>>>linux or at least a good reason not to make a port like that as the unix >>>>>>community seems to be growing and I think for the most part like chess. :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I think I could port the Chess Tiger engine to Linux in less than a week, as it >>>>>is entirely written in C. I use the GCC compiler everyday to work under DOS >>>>>(actually the DJGPP), so compiling to Linux would only involve system-specific >>>>>issues, probably no compiler specific issues. >>>>> >>>>>The Tiger engine has been recently ported to another system running a different >>>>>processor family than the x86, so I guess I have solved most of the portability >>>>>issues by now. >>>>> >>>>>The only problems I see are commercial ones. Are there enough people ready to >>>>>pay for Linux software? Is the system going to be improved and more user >>>>>friendly? Are there good copy-protection schemes for Linux? >>>>> >>>>>When we get a positive answer to all these questions, then we will certainly go >>>>>for Linux. >>>>> >>>>>I know the system is evolving quickly, and a lot of energies are now focused on >>>>>it. I hope Linux will offer a serious alternative to Windows in the near future. >>>>>Wait and see... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Christophe >>>> >>>>If I were you (I'm not) I would consider approaching it like what was done with >>>>Gandalf for Winboard, only do a Chess Tiger for Xboard. You'd be the first kid >>>>on the block to offer a commercial Xboard engine (for whatever that's worth) >>>> >>>>Pete >>> >>>wrong, you can buy diep from me for xboard. it works perfect, >>>see how it runs like the sun under fics. >> >>As usual, I didn't check my facts. Are you using a Linux version of Diep in >>tournaments? > >Bob regurarly offered DIEP to run at a quad xeon for several tournaments, >then i go for linux obviously. > >Now i have myself a cool system: dual PIII800, diep is 10.8% faster >with the msvc compiler which only works of course under windows, as >with the gcc compiler at a PIII. At PII the difference is less, more >like 8.5%, not to mention also that a PIII itself is over 17% faster >as a PII, Xeon is 7% faster as a PII. > >So a quad xeon would be speedup * 0.9 * 0.9 * 550 = speedup * 445.5 > a dual 2.0 * 1.0 * 1.0 * 800 = 1600 > >So to get a quad xeon 550 as fast as a dual PIII800 for diep then i >would need to get a speedup of 3.6 > >Nevertheless the advantage of a local machine without internet >problems is always a big one, and a quad is always outperforming >a dual somehow. It *does* get that nodes a second. Even if it >searches complete bullshit with 1.5 processor, then still it >is filling hashtable which can be used later. > >So despite the theoretical equalness of a quad to a dual for DIEP, >the quad always outperforms the dual practical, basically >because of the better working hashtables, not to mention the fact >that my harddisk is dead slow! > >The huge disadvantage is that it runs remote, in paderborn, both >at ipcc and especially at wccc i wasn't able to connect to the usa >at all (wccc99 2 out of the 7 games!), >as in germany crucial nodes that are between netherlands and germany >seem to turn off their computer in weekends. > >This weak internet in europe at least and especially the huge lag >to the USA is very frustrating. > >Yet it's obvious that running under linux has more advantages as just >making use of the generous offer from Bob! > >One of the big advantages is that you have more test possibilities, >like there are many commercial boundscheckers nowadays for windows, >but there is a great free working boundchecker for gcc 2.95.2, which >i use nowadays regurarly to check DIEP everywhere out. > >Also the fact that it's the only serious competitor for the PC with >windows is an important issue. If there would be other OSes as windows >i doubt i would have done that much effort for linux! > >Yet one thing that sucks bigtime is graphical development under X windows. > >There is nothing to nil for X windows to use in an easy way. > >I am NOT gonna make a diep graphical interface under linux at all actually >without real big commercial interests, the possibility to sell a version or 2 >is not what is tempting to do a big job like that. > >What you need is a good cross development platform. There is nothing working >well in this area. > >I tried Qt, WxWindows i tried really hard, and some other stuff. tcl/tk i >already tried years ago. > >It all sucks bigtime. I develop in first place for windows, linux is second. > >So basically only my engine works under linux. The whole interface is >all win32 API-C SDK code. > >>>but sure christophe won't get rich. i doubt he'll sell more as >>>a single copy. for sure he won't sell it to the 'pete' here. >> >>Oh, you mean me, or the several people here that stole my first name? Yeah, >>it's hard to say, Ed's company does a good job of marketing Chess programs, but >>you're not really set up for doing that yourself. Does anyone other than >>yourself sell Diep, such as ICD, or Gambitsoft? > >Not at the moment, but what do i have to sell except a tough to install >winboard version? > >Not to mention the xboard version. No one ever gets that to work >without learning first a bit about shared memory from linux. > Are you talking about your program or programs in general? Mine works fine and I know nothing about shared memory in Linux. >If you by accident kill diep somehow you need to use >(or use shell script performing) commands like > ipcs > ipcrm shm <segment number> > >If you don't do that, and diep is control-c-ed twice, then linux >is hung. Only getting out power cable works then. > I don't understand this at all. Is it a consequence of your program being SMP? Andrew
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.