On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 09:19:40PM -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote:
I'd like to upgrade mprime, and I see it's linked with glibc 2.1. I have glibc
2.0.7. Will it work? I'm currently running 18.1.
There are some quirks at the moment. You could try, but read the docs
carefully, and have a backup of your
On Thu, Dec 02, 1999 at 03:45:30PM -0600, Willmore, David wrote:
Strangely, I found a libnss_dns-2.0.7.so and a symlink pointing to it
called, of all things, libnss_dns.so.1, not ".2" like I would have expected.
To me, this sounds like a new interface in glibc 2.1.
So, I created a ".2" symlink
On Sat, Dec 04, 1999 at 08:55:02AM -0500, Olivier Langlois wrote:
Yesterday, my Prime95 client have contacted the Primenet server to get more
work to do and since then, my client stopped to do the LL test on the
unfinished prime M7943231.
From what I can see, your computer has started factoring
On Wed, Nov 24, 1999 at 06:21:48PM -0500, Lucas Wiman wrote:
you didn't, or if you did (Then please repost it).
The `nice' way of doing it was posted (by somebody else) to the list the
other day, but I'll resend the answer I gave to David Willmore:
===
If (3x^2 - x - 2)^6 = (a_12)x^12 +
On Wed, Nov 24, 1999 at 02:38:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought you would like to know how easy Steinar's problem
is in UBASIC:
But I explicitly disallowed any use of computers! :-)
BTW, the answer of 32 is correct, but there is a very elegant
solution (which I believe I posted to
On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 12:08:30AM -0500, jim barchuk wrote:
I haven't been reading this list lately. I did receive email on Oct 10
that V19 was avail, and it is 'faster,' so natually I picked it up. It
dropped in and appeared to work fine. BTW I use the static version because
dynamic programs
On Mon, Nov 08, 1999 at 01:28:05AM -0500, Bryan Fullerton wrote:
Well, yes, that's possible - or we can just run the v18 client for FreeBSD.
But v19 is (a bit) faster, and has some extra featurs as well, no?
Given that there already is a v18 for FreeBSD, I'd assume that there's
someone who's
On Sat, Nov 06, 1999 at 10:47:07PM +0100, Francois E Jaccard wrote:
Hi,
Will a version 19 for FreeBSD be available? I would like to transfer a 33M
exponent to a FreeBSD 4.0-current machine.
I've heard that mprime works in `Linux emulation mode', whatever that might
be (I don't run FreeBSD
On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 07:35:03PM -0800, Stefan Struiker wrote:
Haven't received any forwards since Friday Oct. 29th...
That's because the list is so silent.
We need more life. Allow me :-)
Poaching is evil. The millennium starts year 2001. GIMPS is cooler that
distributed.net and SETI@Home
On Thu, Oct 28, 1999 at 05:12:46PM +0200, Lars Lindley wrote:
I think it's about time we find a new prime...
The list is so quiet now.
I'm working on it! ;-)
I think a quiet list is better than a list in rage -- don't try
to start a poaching war again, please... The list isn't that
quiet
On Tue, Oct 26, 1999 at 09:19:24PM -0400, Darxus wrote:
If such a person can gain physical access to your machine, he owns it
already. There is no defense against physical access.
There's a BIG difference here:
1. Unlimited physical access.
2. Physical access for three seconds or so...
And if
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 09:48:00PM -0400, George Woltman wrote:
I took the liberty of looking at this. It appears that even w/ "gcc
-static", the new glibc name resolution stuff contains explicit uses of
several dynamic libraries. If these libraries aren't present,
gethostbyname(3) will
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 03:38:59AM +0200, Lars Lindley wrote:
One more question. Can I by simple means redirect tty8 to an
xterm-session??
Try using a FIFO:
mknod /tmp/mprime-fifo p
./mprime -d /tmp/mprime-fifo
(in xterm)
tail -f /tmp/mprime-fifo
This won't help you redirect tty8 into an
On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 10:03:45PM +0100, Brian J. Beesley wrote:
Have you any idea of the amount of CPU time needed to convert a 10
million bit binary number to a 3 million digit decimal number?
Yes, but you don't need the entire number, do you? Collecting the
low 64 bits doesn't take _that_
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 11:19:41PM -0400, Lucas Wiman wrote:
Though, pi is more useful than most rational numbers (with the
possible exceptions of 0,1/2,1,2).
I'd say 22/7 is about as useful as pi :-)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/sneeze/
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 08:15:31PM -0400, Pierre Abbat wrote:
Try adding the line
8:2345:respawn:/usr/local/bin/mprime
to /etc/inittab.
Note that this can degrade performance -- I don't know why, but it might be
more going on when all the VTs are inited, and the memory map gets more
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 07:39:59AM +0200, Philippe Trottier wrote:
Again if you look from a human eye, we can see (imagine) a nearly possible
period in that number ..., again that's human brain doing overtime... But
again MAYBE, there is a real period to that number...
No.
As far as I
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 09:34:57AM +0200, Philippe Trottier wrote:
HI,
In my old work we had to transfer between two media (paper and computer)
many numbers of about 40 digits long every day... after a while we were
reading them walking a 20 meter distance and telling it to the secretary
On Sat, Oct 16, 1999 at 03:47:42PM -0400, Jud McCranie wrote:
I tried version 19 on a PII and a Celeron, and in both cases it thought
they were P-Pros. It got the MHz correct.
Were these upgraded, or fresh installs? The GIMPS software (still no
collective name for
On Sat, Oct 16, 1999 at 06:27:24AM +0300, Jukka Santala wrote:
If you can afford the bandwidth and storage
space, you can check the box.
The problem probably doesn't lie at the user's end. The server is the one
with the storage problem, and probably the one with the bandwidth problem
as well...
On Thu, Oct 14, 1999 at 06:15:52PM +0100, Chris Jefferson wrote:
In my personal opinion, the best way of doing this would be to set up 3
computers in a 'loop' all doing the same exponent. Then they could
communicate at regular intervals.
We are already doing this manually, although only with 2
On Mon, Oct 11, 1999 at 10:10:04PM +0100, Brian J. Beesley wrote:
Windows users might care to try a nice program called CyberKit, which
is freeware does ping, traceroute NS lookup (amongst other
things).
I don't know if Windows does `other things', but it certainly has
ping (ping) and
On Sun, Oct 10, 1999 at 06:16:15PM (name deleted) wrote:
I think you were extremely rude and should apologize.
I did not mean to sound rude. If I sounded rude, I _do_ apologize -- it was
not my intention at all.
Again, please accept my apologies.
/* Steinar */
On Sun, Oct 10, 1999 at 01:24:35PM -0400, Walt Mankowski wrote:
I just upgraded this morning to the latest Linux version of Linux,
The latest Linux version of Linux? Great! :-)
About one out of every 15 lines says it completed in negative time.
There was a similiar bug discovered during the QA
On Fri, Oct 08, 1999 at 11:32:34PM +1000, Simon Burge wrote:
From what I understand of gcc (the GNU C compiler), the only thing
that using "register" affects is what variables are retained by
setjmp()/longjmp()
From the gcc manpage:
gcc, g++ - GNU project C and C++ Compiler (gcc-2.95)
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 04:17:05AM +0100, Ian L McLoughlin wrote:
Why do primality tests run to the full value of the integerFor any
iteration surely if an exponent is found within the test it should be
reported and the program aborted?.Not being a maths buff...
Perhaps you're referring
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 04:15:27PM -0600, Aaron Blosser wrote:
Hmm...no kidding. Now, correct me if I'm wrong (I probably am) but aren't
those types of encryption schemes based on multiplying large primes together
to generate the "key", and the fact that it would take a VERY long time to
factor
After overclocking my poor 400 MHz PII to 496 MHz (and upping
the voltage from 2.00V to 2.30V), I figured out I should perhaps
do a torture test for a few days, before throwing it at my real
exponents :-) After 10 seconds, I got:
Test 1 of 15, 400 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922945 using 1024K
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 10:21:38AM -0600, Aaron Blosser wrote:
The types of primes found by GIMPS are so incredibly huge that they would
have no practical purpose for encryption.
Nope, there is a crypto system using the Mersennes. Look for a link to it
at www.mersenne.org. (It is also mentioned
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 11:16:27PM -0700, Mike Bandsmer wrote:
Basically, the article gives a simple method of computing an n-point DFT
and an n-point IDFT using only a single complex n-point DFT (and minor
additional computations of complexity O(n)).
[...]
In this way, two exponents could be
At 11:05 30.09.99 +0100, Gordon Spence wrote:
What I would like to know is where can I get a list of the big exponents
and how far they have been trial factored if at all.
To get some BIG exponents assigned, your best bet would probably be talking
to Ken. I guess he's coordinating it as a part
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 07:43:17PM +0100, Brian J. Beesley wrote:
Alignment on 4-byte boundaries is quite sufficient for C floats. Ten-
byte reals (direct copies from FPU registers) are a problem
When did using 10-byte reals become common? As far as I remember, you
don't even have a store
On Sun, Sep 26, 1999 at 10:30:44AM -0700, Will Edgington wrote:
I, personally, have no way of producing executables except for Intel
CPUs, and presently only for Linux (I just yesterday got a old P100
machine up running Win98 (and Prime95, of course:)).
Cross-compilation is a nice thing. Get a
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 04:02:38PM +0100, Robin Stevens wrote:
I'm no expert I'm afraid, but I've done a little more investigating.
I grabbed the source and recompiled primenet.c with the _DEBUG option.
Of course it now works fine (except it insisted on sending off a load of
old results going
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 04:22:53AM -0700, Paul Leyland wrote:
Actually, we at Microsoft Research in Cambridge have seen similar effects
when compiling and running FFTW code. Our discovery is that the alignment
of FP data values is critical.
It is generally for _all_ FP code. Unfortunately, the
On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 02:24:32AM +0100, Ian L McLoughlin wrote:
Really I want to know about the difference between floating point
computation and integer based calculations.
To put it short: FP is _much_ faster on all CPUs. Even on the Cyrixes, which
have very slow FP.
Perhaps somebody can
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 05:45:39PM -0400, George Woltman wrote:
Incidentally, can anyone explain why under v19.0.2 I'm getting "ERROR 2250:
Server unavailable" messages?
Someone told me that glibc-2.1 (as compared to v18's libc5) uses different
files or network setup or something. I am a Linux
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 06:52:40PM -0400, Jud McCranie wrote:
The only
thing (other than the regular system stuff) that I have running is
Prime95. Any ideas?
Try to turn off Prime95 and then retest, OK? :-) It's not easy to
say if Prime95 is the problem, without trying without it.
/*
wasn't that big, so I didn't
bother to FTP upload it etc.)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/sneeze/
/*
* made by Sesse 24.9.99
* no copyrights as of current -- have fun
*/
#include sys/mman.h
#include fcntl.h
#include unistd.h
#include stdio.h
/* w/h = actual width/height
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 05:45:17PM -0500, Willmore, David wrote:
Since it's a cache reading problem there's no real way to 'flush' it.
Normally, that means to write back dirty data to whatever backing store
exists, not 'invalidate everything'. Even if you did, it would't solve the
problem.
How
On Tue, Sep 21, 1999 at 02:03:54PM -0500, Willmore, David wrote:
Correct, it does not. Normally, though, when you're swapping, proper L2
cache coloring is the least of your performance problems.
Yes, but if you _force_ swap-out-swap-in, like ReCache does?
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage:
On Tue, Sep 21, 1999 at 09:25:02PM +0200, Floris Looyesteyn wrote:
I was wondering if Prime95 is affected by the Pentium
FDIV bug. (or some name like that).
I've run it with on a P60 (with the FDIV bug) for 2-3 years now
(at least pre-PrimeNet), and it has never been a problem. Remember
that the
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 09:49:51AM -0500, Willmore, David wrote:
Not really much you can do. The way windows hands out memory almost
guarentees TLB and L2 cache thrashing.
Yeah, but some of the same problems are present when it comes to Linux...
Perhaps I should go back to ReCache... Perhaps as
On Sun, Sep 19, 1999 at 03:02:34AM -0500, Conrad Curry wrote:
Though if the object file is available and can be converted, I don't
see the advantage of compiling from the source.
The main advantage the ability to change it in any way, especially if you
don't _have_ MASM at all (ie. building
On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 03:01:43PM -0400, Darxus wrote:
I have a question though. Why make the Linux source dependant on code
which needs to be assembled under DOS, when there is an assembler for
Linux (as) ?
gas (which is the assembler Linux uses) uses a format quite differently
from NASM.
All,
I'm running Prime95 v18 on a Dell XPS P60 (no, I don't want to hear `switch
to factoring' or anything -- it's running double-checks). When activity
happens (in this case a Word document being opened and looked at), sometimes
the log shows stuff like:
[lots of 0.814 sec iteration times]
On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 01:06:04PM +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
One version of Linux has paid the bill and passed the test, so at least one
version of Linux is Unix.
If you wanted to be picky, you could always say that a version of _GNU_/Linux
has passed the test... The tests aren't
On Thu, Sep 09, 1999 at 04:01:03PM -0600, Blosser, Jeremy wrote:
Anyway, since the Dreamcast runs WinCE
Actually, it doesn't. The Dreamcast has no OS at all, due to delays from
MS in getting a port done. It is true that some of the games will use WinCE
as the OS (included on the game
On Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 11:08:35AM -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
Possible hardware failure, consult the readme file.
Continuing from last save file.
[Sat Sep 11 11:04:20 1999]
Disregard last error. Result is reproducible and thus not a hardware
problem.
Do exactly as it says: disregard the error.
On Wed, Sep 08, 1999 at 03:21:44PM +0100, Michael Oates wrote:
Well I heard that with some programs (and Prime95 may just be that type of
program) may run up to 40% faster than a Pentium III of the same speed.
That sounds like an AMD figure... If I remember the discussion right, Prime95
can't
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 01:16:43PM -0400, Rick Pali wrote:
My question is whether this logic has changed at all. The August 16th GIMPS
update shows me with 13.39 years and 125 exponents tested and I was
surprised to see that Tuesday's update shows 12.58 years and 127 exponents!
All estimates are
On Sun, Aug 29, 1999 at 12:03:19AM -0400, Gord Palameta wrote:
That would produce a version that compiles and executes the same as the
Fortran original, but presumably more slowly because of aliasing in C
preventing some compiler optimizations that Fortran can do.
I've got exactly 0 minutes and
On Thu, Aug 19, 1999 at 05:39:59PM -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
The assembler (micro?) coder had to
keep track of which parts of what execution unit would take how long to do
each instruction, and not rely on results before they were ready. To keep
the machine actually humming along at even close
On Wed, Aug 18, 1999 at 11:10:55PM +0100, Brian J. Beesley wrote:
I find my 21164LX-533 runs code compiled from C source with an Alpha
version of gcc about 4x as fast as an Intel PII-350 runs the same
code compiled with an Intel version of the same mark of the same
compiler.
Note that gcc is
On Sun, Aug 08, 1999 at 11:03:36PM +, Henrik Olsen wrote:
I've had a lot of problems with mixed glibc 2.0 and 2.1 compiled programs
segfaulting immediately on start, it seemed to be a problem with proigrams
compiled for 2.0, and run on a 2.1 system. (Yes, I really mean old
binaries die on a
On Fri, Jul 23, 1999 at 08:16:35PM -0500, Conrad Curry wrote:
Too easy.
From Monty Python's `The Quest For The Holy Grail' (or was King Arthur
involved in the title too?), in case anybody _didn't_ know. (`Look at
the beautiful telephøne system...')
Here's more of a challenge, who wrote this
Why cant i get my peronell statistik?
i use
http://entropia.com/cgi-bin/primenet_user.pl?UserID=youraccountID
an i changed my ID?
It worked a couple of days ago!
Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:05:25AM -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
If I recall, right now we are doing ... ah, I found the
table on George's site, duh.
It's in commonc.h also, in case you have the Prime95/mprime source :-)
so how big of a FFT can the current 18.x.x Prime95 handle? Up to 1024K
At 23:26 14.07.99 -0400, Lucas Wiman wrote:
Speaking of Q2.6, I've heard that with Crandall's DWT, the subtraction
2 step costs nothing at all. It's done automatically within the
transformation. Try checking this with George Woltman.
Is this true?
Not knowing for certain; I thought the DWT
HTTP Error 403
403.9 Access Forbidden: Too many users are connected
This error can be caused if the Web server is busy and cannot process your
request due to heavy traffic. Please try to connect
again later.
Please contact the Web server's administrator if the problem persists.
Sounds like
At 06:59 08.07.99 -0400, Lucas Wiman wrote:
I think that we should put the publicity from the 38th mersenne prime
to good use. If we all write letters to the local paper, then we can
probably gain a very large number of people. Stick encouragements
to join on your website, in you .sig files,
At 11:26 07.07.99 +0200, Grieken, Paul van wrote:
If the current calculation is ready and the computer reach the server
will the old one also be send to the server?
No. When Prime95 has something to send to the server, another file, called
prime.spl, is called. The results.txt file is for manual
On Mon, Jul 05, 1999 at 09:50:42PM -0700, Eric Hahn wrote:
(Note to Scott - create a dummy non-zero residue a stick it
in the cleared exponents report).
Too late!! The Cleared Exponents Report reads:
I think he meant `next time' :-)
/* Steinar */
On Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 12:12:28PM +0200 (OK, late reply, it suddenly
struck me that I hadn't replied...), Sturle Sunde wrote:
number which is tested already, you climb by pushing someone else down.
That isn't very likely to happen, is it? Am I the only one who doesn't
trial-factor random LL
At 07:19 05.07.99 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm curious - had this already been tested by
someone else using the defective v17 software?
No.
/* Steinar */
Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
At 02:21 01.07.99 -0400, Lucas Wiman wrote:
The page belongs to a previous record holder...
Took me about 30 seconds to find it.
It's nice to see a thirty-eighth line in /root/math/ref/mers...
I didn't! Am I _that_ bad at searching the web? I looked at Gordon's page
and Roland's page (found
At 07:17 01.07.99 -0400, Lucas Wiman wrote:
All right, here's a hint: he held the record for largest prime, which was
also
a non-mersenne prime. Check the largest prime by year...
David `Mr. Cray' himself? :-)
/* Steinar */
At 07:17 01.07.99 -0400, Lucas Wiman wrote:
You aren't searching for the right people. He didn't say it was a *GIMPS*
record holder. You've just gotta know where to look.
Found it -- 2^6972593-1 :-)
Well, finding that in 30 seconds must mean you knew it was there, or you
were incredibly
At 08:32 01.07.99 -0300, Nicolau C. Saldanha wrote:
Try the other record holders, there are not too many of them.
You can find links to their home pages at www.mersenne.org.
http://www.mat.puc-rio.br/~nicolau
Don't worry, I've found it already. Looks like I lost the guessing game...
/* Steinar
At 14:10 01.07.99 +0200, Hoogendoorn, Sander wrote:
Try Landon Curt Noll
Yes, I tried it after I send that message. The exponent is hardly secret
now that even I can find it :-)
/* Steinar */
Unsubscribe list info --
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 07:43:33AM -0400, St. Dee wrote:
I'll guess p~=6,740,001 :-)
I'd recommend using a prime, but that's your problem, of course. Well,
nobody has gone _over_ your guess, so it probably doesn't matter. (In
all other case, choosing the highest non-checked prime above
On Mon, Jun 28, 1999 at 11:03:26PM -0400, David A. Miller wrote:
If there is a way for the user to control the
amount of factoring, then it is news to me.
It's in the `Advanced/Factor' menu choice. mprime hasn't got this option,
but I haven't bothered to send in a bug report.
/* Steinar */
On Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 04:16:19AM -0400, Lucas Wiman wrote:
I corrected a few typos. I then added 500 more of them when I added the LL
section. The LL section needs major revision, and clarification, especially
the repeating LL part.
But it still is nice!! Good work. Let us never ever see the
On Sun, Jun 27, 1999 at 09:08:15PM -0400, George Woltman wrote:
Assuming they respond that the claim
is all in order, then we should be able to announce shortly thereafter.
I'm keeping my fingers, toes and hairs crossed :-) Just too bad nobody
else has participated in my guess-contest... That
On Sun, Jun 27, 1999 at 09:18:13AM -0400, George Woltman wrote:
If I execute a command like `ls -l /Win98` (/Win98
is the path of may win98 (vfat) partition) it takes more than a second
to get the result. The second points is, that the swapping seems to be
slower than without running mprime. I
Here is the complete factorization of your number, directly from giantint.
As before, some of these factors may be composite.
3
* 5
* 17
* 257
* 641
* 65537
* 87596535553
* 12360473009170367279616001
* 6700417
* 26017793
* 63766529
* 190274191361
* 67280421310721
* 1256132134125569
*
I can't remember an explicit `rule' against using other numbers than 1...
What about .22/2, giving us _zero_ ones and only one operator? Or is
that considered cheating?
Optionally, perhaps we could write 1000 in another system than our old,
standard decimal one... (9? 11? 9.5? phi?)
/*
On Fri, Jun 11, 1999 at 08:46:53AM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
This made the
computer run faster, I guess by increasing its conduction, and one result I
recall is getting a 600 MHz DEC Alpha chip to run at around 767 MHz? Has
anyone bought this kind of computer, or perhaps done some kind of
Hi all,
After the discussion on the v17 bug, I wondered if I could get some more info
on it (preferrably to avoid doing such mistakes myself :-) ). I've only heard
it referred to as the `shift bug', and I've picked up that v17 was only
required if you wanted to double-check `your own results'.
"Pierre Abbat" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Most modern motherboards contain case and/or CPU temperature
sensors which can be read by software.
Is there a file in /proc that will tell me this?
It's not part of the standard kernel yet, but take a look at
http://www.lm-sensors.nu/.
HTH.
--
On Tue, Jun 08, 1999 at 11:53:30AM +0200, Alex Kruppa wrote:
The math is really quite simple: a number n has log_10(n) (logarithm with base 10)
decimal digits or ld(n) (ld = log_2 = logarithm with base 2) bits.
You can do a base conversion between logarithms from base a to base b by
dividing
On Mon, Jun 07, 1999 at 01:14:19AM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
I just noticed that the EFF is now offering $100,000 prize for the first
10,000,000 digit prime. I assume that this means that they consider the
1,000,000 digit prize essentially considered to have been claimed?
The $100,000 prize
On Mon, Jun 07, 1999 at 02:11:01PM -0400, Pierre Abbat wrote:
I think it would be better to act like a daemon and reread its configuration
file when hung up on. That way we wouldn't have to stop it, start it
interactively, then start it again in the background to tell it when we go on
vacation.
Hi, and congratulations to all of you for the (probable) prime.
Even though it's not 100% certain and published yet, would it be an idea to
update GIMPS' and PrimeNet's web pages, with at least a note of the finding?
/* Steinar */
Brian (and any list members that might be interested):
I've ported ReCache to Linux, and tested it out. Oddly enough, it didn't help.
I'm not sure if I've ported the spawnl() call in a wrong way (I'm doing a
fork() and then an exec()), but it certainly doesn't help (the iteration
time goes up
On Sat, May 15, 1999 at 12:52:56AM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
Why not just write a piece of code that (during installation of Prime95)
removes the screensaver start-up line in the ini (windows) files.
Well, as Prime95 is only installed once, and the users are adding screen
savers all the
OK, second message in a row, I just thought it would be nice to separate them.
Has anybody got experience in turning off/disabling screensavers under Win95?
We run Prime95 at 40 machines (most of them 486'es, though) at school, and
screen savers are CPU hoggers (I suppose... at least everybody
Hello,
I've compiled mprime on my own (after doing some minor changes to make it
compile under glibc2), and I've noticed something strange. If I run the program
with -m, and use `Test/Continue', I get an iteration time of 0.201 secs
(n=7398xxx, P2/400 overclocked to 448MHz (bus=112MHz,
On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 05:54:50PM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
From the IA-64 register set figure in the advert, one weakness appears to me
to be the sheer amount of silicon: Intel is going from just 8 FP registers
in all the Pentium incarnations to a whopping 128, each still having the
x86's
Second reply to the same message...
On Mon, May 03, 1999 at 11:22:02AM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 10:44:16 -0600
From: "Blosser, Jeremy" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Mersenne: JavaPrime update... (Lotsa Questions)
b) Would it be more optimal to use a properly sized FFT
On Mon, May 03, 1999 at 11:22:02AM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
Also, I'm wondering if any pattern begins to occur in the N=N^2-2 % 2^P-1
sequence... Do you think N ever repeats itself? Has anyone checked this?
I checked it some years ago. It doesn't seem to. (But Mandelbrot fractals
do, that's
On Thu, Apr 22, 1999 at 04:16:54PM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
Well, my assumption is that GCC doesn't do 64-bit... I wish I were a Ultra
guru like the one that did the DES port for Distributed.net... that thing
flies! I was getting 24Million keys/sec on just that one Quad machine...
The Quad
On Mon, Apr 19, 1999 at 06:53:08PM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
And that is precisely why it *is* possible to have a compiler do the following
Yes, a compiler.
Assembly doesn't use a compiler. A compiler changes the C code into assembly
code. The assembler only translates the assembly codes
On Thu, 15 Apr 1999 at 09:17:38 -0700, Scott Kurowski wrote:
I've been working with developers of several client ports.
Chris Smith is about 90% done with a PrimeNet client for UNIX and
Alphas based on MacLucasUNIX. We'll probably start testing with the
live server in early May. Until then,
On Sat, 10 Apr 1999 08:41:16 -0600, Aaron Blosser wrote:
Also, do you plan to optimize the assembly code in any way for the new types
of CPU's out? AMD's K6-3, Pentium III, etc. It would certainly "seem" that
some slight tweaking could be done to squeeze out a few extra percent of
improvement,
(Sorry for replying to a digest, people... I haven't found an easy way to
extract and reply to a single message.)
On Mon, Apr 12, 1999 at 05:38:12PM -0700, Mersenne Digest wrote:
I would find a popup box a terrible nuisance, so I'd like an option
to turn it off or on, with default off.
If it
Hello,
I know many have complained about my console idea (which, as I said, was not
very realistic at this point), because they only have single precision. I
just want you to consider that George once had an _integer_ version of Prime95
running, but it was roughly 7 times slower (if I remember
Just to add some life to this list... No, this is _not_ a joke. This is only
a really crazy idea.
We are always in search of more CPU power. Since toasters are not (yet)
powerful enough to run LL tests, I thought we might turn to the second
greatest mass of CPU power: consoles.
Those machines
"Brian J Beesley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd be VERY interested to hear of anyone running Prime95 on a
Xeon - the Xeon has 512K, 1M or 2M of L2 cache running at core
speed (at painful, extortionate and positively obscene prices,
respectively) - benchmark comparisons with PII systems at the
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 12:57:13PM -0600, William H. Geiger III wrote:
These guys are snake-oil vendors. I don't know what type of prime test
they are claiming to have or not have but from my exposure to their crypto
claims I wouldn't trust anything from them without proof.
Remember that snake
101 - 200 of 204 matches
Mail list logo
