Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Hi Sylvain, Some computer-go friends in Japan have reported that even current binary of MoGo doesn't work on Athlon XP or Celeron. Both (and Pentium III) have no SSE2 instructions while Pentium 4 has. Could you please try -march=athlon-xp, pentium3 or generic? Hideki Sylvain Gelly: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Markus, Hi all, I updated the package to fix the issues you get and some other minor ones. Please update before reporting a problem, and please report any further problem :-). I don't know about Ubuntu, but the default GCC configuration on Fedora does not set CPU-specific compiler options, so an executable should run on the whole family of i386 processors. I don't use the default gcc options, you can make it significantly faster tuning the options. If you add some Intel-Core 2 specific options yourself, I would be interested, what they are, and in what speedup they really result. For Athlons, I never found a significant difference between enabling AMD architecture or just using the default configuration. I used --march=opteron, and that gives a +3% on a core2duo compared to --march=pentium4, while working on all recent machines (but apparently not on your Athlon XP :) ). I switched back to --march=pentium4 Tell me if it works now (hopefully), Cheers, Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Hi Hideki, Some computer-go friends in Japan have reported that even current binary of MoGo doesn't work on Athlon XP or Celeron. Both (and Pentium III) have no SSE2 instructions while Pentium 4 has. Ok, I have to compile for older processor too then (I did not expect so old proc were still existing :)) Could you please try -march=athlon-xp, pentium3 or generic? I will. I do it ASAP and let you know. Best, Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Some computer-go friends in Japan have reported that even current binary of MoGo doesn't work on Athlon XP or Celeron. Both (and Pentium III) have no SSE2 instructions while Pentium 4 has. Could you please try -march=athlon-xp, pentium3 or generic? Hideki If it was possible to release the source-code, then all problems could be easily solved by people themself. Please consider this again. Regards Martin ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
On Monday 10 September 2007 10:37:17 Sylvain Gelly wrote: Is there a option like gnugo's --capture-all-dead? In my test(./mogo --9 --time 1), seems mogo passed when not capture alldead stones. As this release is mainly for humans to play, it is set to play against humans, so passing as soon as the opponent passes and it is safe to pass. If you really want it not to pass, you should add a --playsAgainstHuman 0 (I am not exactly sure of the exact spelling of the option and I can't test from here. Let me know if it does not work). By the way, is --time 0.1 valid? Yes Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ Thanks for releasing binary mogo, and congratulations for your really nice job. I'm waiting patiently for your phd theses... I have access to a cool cluster (50 CPU 100 Go RAM) and will asap run the ~1500 gnugo genmove regression tests with mogo ... just to see what happens. I'll post the results when it is done, but i have to wait for availability... Bonnes continuations. Alain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [spam probable] Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
2007/9/10, David Stafford [EMAIL PROTECTED]: What are the options for someone who would like a dan-level opponent (even if it's 9x9) but doesn't have a Linux system currently? Are there choices other than MoGo? If not, I'm willing to build a Linux box but I have some questions: - Is a quad-core Xeon better for MoGo than a higher-clocked Core 2 Duo? - How much RAM? - Which Linux distribution has it been tested with? It has been tested by myself on Mandriva 2006, Mandriva 2007, debian a recent one, ubuntu a recent one, and be others on this list which reported a working MoGo :). For the hardware question, 512 Mo RAM is enough in common use, and the tree garbage collector is by default set to use less than 400 Mo RAM. Of course you can change it to use more RAM. For the speed, it is difficult to say, but let's say that you loose 20% to go from 2 CPUs to 4 CPUs at same clock. It is an approximate rule, and it also depends on how long you let him think: the longer it thinks, the bigger is the tree, the more time it spends in the tree, the less efficient is the multihreading. Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Have you tried Visual C++? http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/express/aa975050.aspx The thing is that VC++ does not have the pthread library. Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
2007/9/10, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The command line parameter to change board size does nothing. I tried: ./mogo --19 ./mogo -19 and it only seemed to want to play on 9x9 boards.Am I doing something wrong? As I explained earlier in an answer, the command line parameters only affects some tuning, but MoGo trusts the GTP commands. You have to specify at some point boardsize xx A similar problem with the levels - it doesn't seem to matter what time I set. Ah, that would be a problem. I can't test from here, I will test tonight. Does the command line parsing work? It would be a shame if it does not work, does it ;) Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
I'm a little confused. If I operate with no parameters it works ok, No parameters means --19 but if I do ./mogo --7 (for instance) it goes into some kind of self-training mode. Did you see a --7 option on the manual? :-p There is no --7 option, nor a --13 one. You should put a --9 or a --19. BTW, I am not sure this version can actually play in 7x7 (maybe, maybe not). For the 13x13, I guess the --19 is more appropriate. If I go with no command line options, I can set any board using gtp commands but I can't change the number of processes used. The number of processes can only set using --nbThreads x in the command line. It really does not work for you? That is puzzling! Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Well, I'm hoping for a Mac version someday... Hopefully it will happen. As I don't have a Mac, I rely on external help. I'll let you know :). Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
when I run the Linux exeutable on my Fedora 8/Athlon XP, I get a coredump: $ mogo --9 --time 12 Load opening database opening succeed (nbEntries=618) (nbIllegalMoves removed 0) tried to open opening, success 1 Illegal instruction (core dumped) could it be that it is compiled for specific CPU architecture? Of course it is :). Ok, good (well, rather sad :)), to know that it does not work on Athlon XP. I should rebuild with an older architecture then (but it will be slower :-( ). Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Is there a option like gnugo's --capture-all-dead? In my test(./mogo --9 --time 1), seems mogo passed when not capture alldead stones. As this release is mainly for humans to play, it is set to play against humans, so passing as soon as the opponent passes and it is safe to pass. If you really want it not to pass, you should add a --playsAgainstHuman 0 (I am not exactly sure of the exact spelling of the option and I can't test from here. Let me know if it does not work). By the way, is --time 0.1 valid? Yes Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Hi Sylvain and all, Thank you very much for sharing the binaries. I am very interested in a windows binary to use MoGo as an extra sparring partner, (I cannot use linux at this moment), I do not mind if the binary is slower, because even then the MoGo program will be stonger then my program... Goodbye Sylvain and have much success in your life. Edward. Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:20:59 +0200 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go@computer-go.org Subject: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo Hi all, I am pleased to announce a binary release of current version of MoGo. It is specially designed for players but of course it may be interesting for some of you as a benchmark. You download it and see the instructions there: http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/MoGo.htm Of course, please feel free to talk of it around you, share the link, and put the link on your webpage :). Please distribute the link but not the package directly, so that I keep track of the distribution, and maybe put some fixes, so that people always get the latest version. Unfortunately, only the linux version is available (for the moment?). I wanted to wait for the windows version to be available at the same time, but it is 2 times slower than the linux version(!!), so I decided not to distribute it for the moment. I use cygwin for that, and maybe the reason is that cygwin has only gcc 3.4.2, and which produce a much slower binary. If anyone has a solution, I would be pleased to put the windows version as soon as possible. I would also take this occasion to say goodbye to you all, and thank you for all the discussions. I now finished (and almost defended :)) my PhD, and my work on MoGo is finished. So it is very likely that I will not make any further contribution to MoGo. I would like to say that I spent a very good year in the computer Go community, with of course a warm special thank to Yizao. Of course, I will follow the future discussions on this list with pleasure. Best, Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _ De mooiste afbeeldingen van Jessica Simpson vind je met Live Search http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=jessica%20simpsonFORM=BIRE___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Have you tried Visual C++? http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/express/aa975050.aspx The thing is that VC++ does not have the pthread library. This library might be help. http://sources.redhat.com/pthreads-win32/ # I have not used it, though -- Yamato ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
On Monday 10 September 2007, Sylvain Gelly wrote: could it be that it is compiled for specific CPU architecture? Of course it is :). Ok, good (well, rather sad :)), to know that it does not work on Athlon XP. I should rebuild with an older architecture then (but it will be slower :-( ). I don't know about Ubuntu, but the default GCC configuration on Fedora does not set CPU-specific compiler options, so an executable should run on the whole family of i386 processors. If you add some Intel-Core 2 specific options yourself, I would be interested, what they are, and in what speedup they really result. For Athlons, I never found a significant difference between enabling AMD architecture or just using the default configuration. - Markus ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
The point is that if I start it with ANY command line options (not using goui but typing the gtp commands in a shell) it immediately goes into some self-learning mode and you cannot play games. I haven't tried it with gogui. - Don On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 10:21 +0200, Sylvain Gelly wrote: 2007/9/10, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The command line parameter to change board size does nothing. I tried: ./mogo --19 ./mogo -19 and it only seemed to want to play on 9x9 boards.Am I doing something wrong? As I explained earlier in an answer, the command line parameters only affects some tuning, but MoGo trusts the GTP commands. You have to specify at some point boardsize xx A similar problem with the levels - it doesn't seem to matter what time I set. Ah, that would be a problem. I can't test from here, I will test tonight. Does the command line parsing work? It would be a shame if it does not work, does it ;) Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 10:34 +0200, Sylvain Gelly wrote: I'm a little confused. If I operate with no parameters it works ok, No parameters means --19 but if I do ./mogo --7 (for instance) it goes into some kind of self-training mode. Did you see a --7 option on the manual? :-p It doesn't matter - if I do --19 the same behavior, I can not longer type gtp commands in a shell - it goes into self-training. If I start like this: ./mogo --nbThreads 2 It ALSO goes into self-training and gtp commands do not work. There is no --7 option, nor a --13 one. You should put a --9 or a --19. BTW, I am not sure this version can actually play in 7x7 (maybe, maybe not). For the 13x13, I guess the --19 is more appropriate. If I go with no command line options, I can set any board using gtp commands but I can't change the number of processes used. The number of processes can only set using --nbThreads x in the command line. It really does not work for you? That is puzzling! Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Ok, Sorry for all the trouble.I didn't know you HAD to type a level option. I can now do ./mogo --9 --nbThreads 2 I think I was a bit confused by the self-train initialization message which appears whether it's accepting gtp commands or not. If you do ./mogo --nbThreads 2 as you say it starts doing some kind of training and it doesn't respond to GTP but as you say this is normal. ./mogo --19 does work correctly. Even if I then type boardsize 7 or some other boardsize.This is all quite a bit confusing - but I think I have a working version of mogo. Thanks!!! - Don On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 17:17 +0200, Sylvain Gelly wrote: It doesn't matter - if I do --19 the same behavior, I can not longer type gtp commands in a shell - it goes into self-training. That is not normal. You mean you typed: ./mogo --19 and it does not go to gtp mode? If I start like this: ./mogo --nbThreads 2 It ALSO goes into self-training and gtp commands do not work. That is normal. First option as to be either --9 or --19. Cheers, Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Hi Markus, Hi all, I updated the package to fix the issues you get and some other minor ones. Please update before reporting a problem, and please report any further problem :-). I don't know about Ubuntu, but the default GCC configuration on Fedora does not set CPU-specific compiler options, so an executable should run on the whole family of i386 processors. I don't use the default gcc options, you can make it significantly faster tuning the options. If you add some Intel-Core 2 specific options yourself, I would be interested, what they are, and in what speedup they really result. For Athlons, I never found a significant difference between enabling AMD architecture or just using the default configuration. I used --march=opteron, and that gives a +3% on a core2duo compared to --march=pentium4, while working on all recent machines (but apparently not on your Athlon XP :) ). I switched back to --march=pentium4 Tell me if it works now (hopefully), Cheers, Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Well, it has been a pleasure and instructive for all of us! Good luck with whatever comes next. Cheers, David On 9, Sep 2007, at 12:20 PM, Sylvain Gelly wrote: I would also take this occasion to say goodbye to you all, and thank you for all the discussions. I now finished (and almost defended :)) my PhD, and my work on MoGo is finished. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Congratulations. Are there any plans to release the source? Perhaps someone else will figure out how to port it. - Brian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
2007/9/9, Brian Slesinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Are there any plans to release the source? I don't think so. Plus, some will work on MoGo source code, so it is their decision, not mine. Perhaps someone else will figure out how to port it. Well, it actually builds and work on windows, only the speed is an issue. I should try if the speed is the same on linux with such an old compiler. My guess is that it is really a matter of compiler version. (even if it seems incredible to have a +100% speed only with the compiler!). Maybe it is also a question of libc version? Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Thanks Sylvain, This is a wonderful gift to the computer go community! - Don On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 21:20 +0200, Sylvain Gelly wrote: Hi all, I am pleased to announce a binary release of current version of MoGo. It is specially designed for players but of course it may be interesting for some of you as a benchmark. You download it and see the instructions there: http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/MoGo.htm Of course, please feel free to talk of it around you, share the link, and put the link on your webpage :). Please distribute the link but not the package directly, so that I keep track of the distribution, and maybe put some fixes, so that people always get the latest version. Unfortunately, only the linux version is available (for the moment?). I wanted to wait for the windows version to be available at the same time, but it is 2 times slower than the linux version(!!), so I decided not to distribute it for the moment. I use cygwin for that, and maybe the reason is that cygwin has only gcc 3.4.2, and which produce a much slower binary. If anyone has a solution, I would be pleased to put the windows version as soon as possible. I would also take this occasion to say goodbye to you all, and thank you for all the discussions. I now finished (and almost defended :)) my PhD, and my work on MoGo is finished. So it is very likely that I will not make any further contribution to MoGo. I would like to say that I spent a very good year in the computer Go community, with of course a warm special thank to Yizao. Of course, I will follow the future discussions on this list with pleasure. Best, Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
On 9/9/07, Sylvain Gelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps someone else will figure out how to port it. Well, it actually builds and work on windows, only the speed is an issue. I should try if the speed is the same on linux with such an old compiler. My guess is that it is really a matter of compiler version. (even if it seems incredible to have a +100% speed only with the compiler!). Maybe it is also a question of libc version? Well, I'm hoping for a Mac version someday... - Brian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
when I run the Linux exeutable on my Fedora 8/Athlon XP, I get a coredump: $ mogo --9 --time 12 Load opening database opening succeed (nbEntries=618) (nbIllegalMoves removed 0) tried to open opening, success 1 Illegal instruction (core dumped) could it be that it is compiled for specific CPU architecture? - Markus ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
when I run the Linux exeutable on my Fedora 8/Athlon XP, I get a I mean Fedora 7... - Markus ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
What are the options for someone who would like a dan-level opponent (even if it's 9x9) but doesn't have a Linux system currently? Are there choices other than MoGo? If not, I'm willing to build a Linux box but I have some questions: - Is a quad-core Xeon better for MoGo than a higher-clocked Core 2 Duo? - How much RAM? - Which Linux distribution has it been tested with? Any advice you can offer is greatfully appreciated. Thanks, David ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
I have no problem running on a core 2 duo Ubuntu linux (feisty fawn) It also runs with multiple threads. I tried 8 threads (even though I have only 2 cores) and it worked just fine. - Don On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 01:33 +0200, Cenny Wenner wrote: Runs like a charm on FC6 64bit, one core. How impressively fast MoGo is. Thank you for sharing. On 9/10/07, Markus Enzenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: when I run the Linux exeutable on my Fedora 8/Athlon XP, I get a I mean Fedora 7... - Markus ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
It is a good news for all of us. I have no time to develop my Go program now, but I will use it as a local opponent when I come back again. Unfortunately, only the linux version is available (for the moment?). I wanted to wait for the windows version to be available at the same time, but it is 2 times slower than the linux version(!!), so I decided not to distribute it for the moment. I use cygwin for that, and maybe the reason is that cygwin has only gcc 3.4.2, and which produce a much slower binary. If anyone has a solution, I would be pleased to put the windows version as soon as possible. Have you tried Visual C++? http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/express/aa975050.aspx -- Yamato ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
I'm a little confused. If I operate with no parameters it works ok, but if I do ./mogo --7 (for instance) it goes into some kind of self-training mode. It seems to do this no matter what parameter I use including setting the number of processes. If I go with no command line options, I can set any board using gtp commands but I can't change the number of processes used. - Don On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 20:40 -0400, Don Dailey wrote: The command line parameter to change board size does nothing. I tried: ./mogo --19 ./mogo -19 and it only seemed to want to play on 9x9 boards.Am I doing something wrong? A similar problem with the levels - it doesn't seem to matter what time I set. Does the command line parsing work? - Don On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 19:43 -0400, Don Dailey wrote: I have no problem running on a core 2 duo Ubuntu linux (feisty fawn) It also runs with multiple threads. I tried 8 threads (even though I have only 2 cores) and it worked just fine. - Don On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 01:33 +0200, Cenny Wenner wrote: Runs like a charm on FC6 64bit, one core. How impressively fast MoGo is. Thank you for sharing. On 9/10/07, Markus Enzenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: when I run the Linux exeutable on my Fedora 8/Athlon XP, I get a I mean Fedora 7... - Markus ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
What are the options for someone who ... doesn't have a Linux system currently? LiveCDs ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveCD ) allow you to do a temporary linux installation. Of course, then you have to decide which one, and which distro. I would think any of those marked for general in this page would be fine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_LiveDistros Darren ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Thanks Sylvain for this wonderful gift! Is there a option like gnugo's --capture-all-dead? In my test(./mogo --9 --time 1), seems mogo passed when not capture alldead stones. By the way, is --time 0.1 valid? ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
