Re: Bug#659494: Resigns more points than necessary when fewer points would still result in opponent win
|
View:
New views
15 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
 |
|
|
|
Re: Bug#659494: Resigns more points than necessary when fewer points would still result in opponent win
by Michael Petch
::
Rate this Message:
On 14/02/2012 2:31 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I received the following bug against the Debian gnubg package. I vaguely > recall that this implementation decision was discussed on the mailing list > before and that the current behavior is intentional, but I don't recall > whether there was discussion of making it a tuneable option or exactly > what the rationale was. > This is my opinion only (others may wish to chime in), and I was part of the discussion on this list previously. I consider the behavior intentional. Resigning more points than necessary (albeit correct) still is a win. How many points one wins by isn't relevant. Resigning fewer points is an issue, resigning more at the end of a match doesn't make any difference. Having an option for this is pointless. GNUBG has a lot of options as is, but adding one that has no inherent value, and seems (IMHO) absolutely pointless to me. I say stick with what exists, and I consider this complaint invalid from a user. A user has to understand that in match play, a win is a win no matter how many points it is by. That is what I would tell the end user. Tom Keith's www.bkgm.com is a source of everything Backgammon (almost like a online bible for the game). Have a look at: http://www.bkgm.com/rules/match.html . There is this paragraph that sums it up nicely: "There is no bonus for winning more than the required number of points in match play. The sole goal is to win the match, and the size of the victory doesn't matter." . -- Michael Petch CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: Bug#659494: Resigns more points than necessary when fewer points would still result in opponent win
by Michael Petch
::
Rate this Message:
As an addendum. Bots often make what seem like unnatural plays compared
with that of a human. If every decision has the same equity the bot will use the one that happens to be at the top of it's decision list (And to a human can seem random and odd). If we start going down this slippery slope then the user will then ask us why the bot might do this (look at what move the bot plays in this case. It doesn't save the gammon): GNU Backgammon Position ID: AwAA2Lo7EAAAAA Match ID : 8AlnAaAAAAAA +24-23-22-21-20-19------18-17-16-15-14-13-+ O: mpetch OOO | O | | | 10 points OOO | O | | | OOO | | | | OO | | | | OO | | | | | |BAR| |v 11 point match (Cube: 1) | | | | | | | | | X X X | | | | X X X X X | | | Rolled 61 | X X X X X X | | X | 0 points +-1--2--3--4--5--6-------7--8--9-10-11-12-+ X: gnubg 1. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 4/3 MWC: 0.000% 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] 2. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 3/2 MWC: 0.000% ( 0.000%) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] 3. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 2/1 MWC: 0.000% ( 0.000%) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] 4. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 1/off MWC: 0.000% ( 0.000%) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] 5. Cubeful 2-ply 12/5 MWC: 0.000% ( 0.000%) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] 6. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 5/4 MWC: 0.000% ( 0.000%) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] ---- To a human, it may seem natural to save gammon - to the bot it knew it was playing a lost cause so it decided not to even save itself from a gammon. The bot knows it has no way to win, and that all moves have 0 equity. In this case the first move listed gets used which is 12/6 4/3 which gets the bot gammoned. The human win 12-0. But a human might say "hey wait a minute I should have only won by 11-0, what is the bot doing it is unnatural not to save a gammon - a human likely wouldn't do that). Same principle applies here. Bot doesn't care how much the human wins by. A win is a win no matter the number of points you go over by. Should there be an option that the bot must play to save gammons and backgammons in lost causes (absolutely 0% chance to win)? I'd say heck no, again pointless as the end result of a match loss remains unchanged. -- Michael Petch CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: Bug#659494: Resigns more points than necessary when fewer points would still result in opponent win
by Joseph Heled
::
Rate this Message:
if the bot does not care about points lost, it should resign, no?
-Joseph On 15 February 2012 11:23, Michael Petch <mpetch@...> wrote: > As an addendum. Bots often make what seem like unnatural plays compared > with that of a human. If every decision has the same equity the bot will > use the one that happens to be at the top of it's decision list (And to > a human can seem random and odd). If we start going down this slippery > slope then the user will then ask us why the bot might do this (look at > what move the bot plays in this case. It doesn't save the gammon): > > GNU Backgammon Position ID: AwAA2Lo7EAAAAA > Match ID : 8AlnAaAAAAAA > +24-23-22-21-20-19------18-17-16-15-14-13-+ O: mpetch > OOO | O | | | 10 points > OOO | O | | | > OOO | | | | > OO | | | | > OO | | | | > | |BAR| |v 11 point match (Cube: 1) > | | | | > | | | | > | X X X | | | > | X X X X X | | | Rolled 61 > | X X X X X X | | X | 0 points > +-1--2--3--4--5--6-------7--8--9-10-11-12-+ X: gnubg > > > 1. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 4/3 MWC: 0.000% > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > 2. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 3/2 MWC: 0.000% ( > 0.000%) > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > 3. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 2/1 MWC: 0.000% ( > 0.000%) > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > 4. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 1/off MWC: 0.000% ( > 0.000%) > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > 5. Cubeful 2-ply 12/5 MWC: 0.000% ( > 0.000%) > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > 6. Cubeful 2-ply 12/6 5/4 MWC: 0.000% ( > 0.000%) > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > > > ---- > > To a human, it may seem natural to save gammon - to the bot it knew it > was playing a lost cause so it decided not to even save itself from a > gammon. The bot knows it has no way to win, and that all moves have 0 > equity. In this case the first move listed gets used which is 12/6 4/3 > which gets the bot gammoned. The human win 12-0. But a human might say > "hey wait a minute I should have only won by 11-0, what is the bot doing > it is unnatural not to save a gammon - a human likely wouldn't do that). > > Same principle applies here. Bot doesn't care how much the human wins > by. A win is a win no matter the number of points you go over by. Should > there be an option that the bot must play to save gammons and > backgammons in lost causes (absolutely 0% chance to win)? I'd say heck > no, again pointless as the end result of a match loss remains unchanged. > > -- > Michael Petch > CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. > OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 > > _______________________________________________ > Bug-gnubg mailing list > Bug-gnubg@... > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: Bug#659494: Resigns more points than necessary when fewer points would still result in opponent win
by Michael Petch
::
Rate this Message:
On 14/02/2012 3:32 PM, Joseph Heled wrote:
> if the bot does not care about points lost, it should resign, no? > In the case I showed yes, the bot would have already resigned. But in my example I used it as a "edit position" and asked the bot to tell me what it should do with the play. Although outside a complete match. My example may not have been the best one. A better example is probably this one: GNU Backgammon Position ID: CgAA2Lo7AAACAA Match ID : 8AlgAaAAAAAA +24-23-22-21-20-19------18-17-16-15-14-13-+ O: mpetch OOO | O O | | | 10 points OOO | | | | OOO | | | | OO | | | | OO | | | | | |BAR| |v 11 point match (Cube: 1) | | | | | | | | | X X X | | | | X X X X X | | | On roll | X X X X X X | X | | 0 points +-1--2--3--4--5--6-------7--8--9-10-11-12-+ X: gnubg 1. Cubeful 2-ply bar/15 6/1(2) MWC: 0.000% 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.9830 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] 2. Cubeful 2-ply bar/20 6/1(3) MWC: 0.000% ( 0.000%) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.9830 0.6944 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] 3. Cubeful 2-ply bar/5 MWC: 0.000% ( 0.000%) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.8981 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] 4. Cubeful 2-ply bar/10 6/1 MWC: 0.000% ( 0.000%) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.9830 0.0000 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] The Bot had a chance to win before the roll, but not after. In this case it happens that it plays bar/15 6/1(2). It doesn't save the gammon, and on next roll the bot will resign. It could have saved the gammon but it didn't. Apply same argument from my original position to this. -- Michael Petch CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: Bug#659494: Resigns more points than necessary when fewer points would still result in opponent win
by Michael Petch
::
Rate this Message:
On 14/02/2012 3:47 PM, Michael Petch wrote:
> GNU Backgammon Position ID: CgAA2Lo7AAACAA > Match ID : 8AlgAaAAAAAA > +24-23-22-21-20-19------18-17-16-15-14-13-+ O: mpetch > OOO | O O | | | 10 points > OOO | | | | > OOO | | | | > OO | | | | > OO | | | | > | |BAR| |v 11 point match (Cube: 1) > | | | | > | | | | > | X X X | | | > | X X X X X | | | On roll > | X X X X X X | X | | 0 points > +-1--2--3--4--5--6-------7--8--9-10-11-12-+ X: gnubg > Damn, the diagram was wrong for the hint. I meant to have this diagram show the bot rolling double 5 from the bar but I copied the wrong position to ASCII. It should have been: GNU Backgammon Position ID: CgAA2Lo7AAACAA Match ID : 8Il2AaAAAAAA +24-23-22-21-20-19------18-17-16-15-14-13-+ O: mpetch OOO | O O | | | 10 points OOO | | | | OOO | | | | OO | | | | OO | | | | | |BAR| |v 11 point match (Cube: 1) | | | | | | | | | X X X | | | | X X X X X | | | Rolled 55 | X X X X X X | X | | 0 points +-1--2--3--4--5--6-------7--8--9-10-11-12-+ X: gnubg -- Michael Petch CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: Bug#659494: Resigns more points than necessary when fewer points would still result in opponent win
by Joseph Heled
::
Rate this Message:
Apply my argument again:) The bot should roll, then resign.
(I am not saying how hard or easy it is to do in gnubg, but just what makes sense for a bot) -Joseph On 15 February 2012 11:47, Michael Petch <mpetch@...> wrote: > On 14/02/2012 3:32 PM, Joseph Heled wrote: >> if the bot does not care about points lost, it should resign, no? >> > In the case I showed yes, the bot would have already resigned. But in my > example I used it as a "edit position" and asked the bot to tell me what > it should do with the play. Although outside a complete match. My > example may not have been the best one. A better example is probably > this one: > > GNU Backgammon Position ID: CgAA2Lo7AAACAA > Match ID : 8AlgAaAAAAAA > +24-23-22-21-20-19------18-17-16-15-14-13-+ O: mpetch > OOO | O O | | | 10 points > OOO | | | | > OOO | | | | > OO | | | | > OO | | | | > | |BAR| |v 11 point match (Cube: 1) > | | | | > | | | | > | X X X | | | > | X X X X X | | | On roll > | X X X X X X | X | | 0 points > +-1--2--3--4--5--6-------7--8--9-10-11-12-+ X: gnubg > > 1. Cubeful 2-ply bar/15 6/1(2) MWC: 0.000% > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.9830 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > 2. Cubeful 2-ply bar/20 6/1(3) MWC: 0.000% ( > 0.000%) > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.9830 0.6944 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > 3. Cubeful 2-ply bar/5 MWC: 0.000% ( > 0.000%) > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.8981 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > 4. Cubeful 2-ply bar/10 6/1 MWC: 0.000% ( > 0.000%) > 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 1.0000 0.9830 0.0000 > 2-ply cubeful prune [world class] > > > > The Bot had a chance to win before the roll, but not after. In this case > it happens that it plays bar/15 6/1(2). It doesn't save the gammon, and > on next roll the bot will resign. It could have saved the gammon but it > didn't. Apply same argument from my original position to this. > > -- > Michael Petch > CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. > OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
How about Ubuntu guys look at real bugs on their platform
by Michael Petch
::
Rate this Message:
On 14/02/2012 3:49 PM, Joseph Heled wrote:
> Apply my argument again:) The bot should roll, then resign. > > (I am not saying how hard or easy it is to do in gnubg, but just what > makes sense for a bot) > What is the point? The bot will resign on it's next roll. My question is why should it matter whether it resigned on the current roll or the next one. Both ways end up the same. One has one more roll by the human. WHat value would it be to modify the bot to resign on roll or wait for the next. The value IMHO just isn;t there to be bothered. Ultimately it is going to be the same result. I ask you what value is gained in reality either way. I can not think of any argument to persue something that has no value. If I were Russ, I wouldn't be bothering with a very low priority 5 like this. If someone want stop code it they can waste their time. I think Russ and Ubuntu folks should fix the big gaping Priority one catastrophic bug that really should have GNUBG pulled from that platform until fixed. That bug is the one that causes the mouse to freeze on that platform (Ubuntu 11.04+). Right now, the bug in question is so catastrophic that it renders our product useless on Ubuntu if someone wants to view the analysis from the move list. The bug doesn't exist on the current main Debian Wheezy or Sid releases. If it were me, I would pull GNUBG from Ubuntu until it is resolved. -- Michael Petch CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: How about Ubuntu guys look at real bugs on their platform
by Russ Allbery
::
Rate this Message:
Michael Petch <mpetch@...> writes:
> If I were Russ, I wouldn't be bothering with a very low priority 5 like > this. I'm happy to pass your answer back to the bug reporter and close out the bug. I suspected something along those lines would be the answer, but didn't want to put words in your mouth. > If someone want stop code it they can waste their time. I think Russ and > Ubuntu folks should fix the big gaping Priority one catastrophic bug > that really should have GNUBG pulled from that platform until > fixed. That bug is the one that causes the mouse to freeze on that > platform (Ubuntu 11.04+). > Right now, the bug in question is so catastrophic that it renders our > product useless on Ubuntu if someone wants to view the analysis from the > move list. > The bug doesn't exist on the current main Debian Wheezy or Sid releases. > If it were me, I would pull GNUBG from Ubuntu until it is resolved. I'm not entirely sure who this is aimed at. So far as I know, no one involved in this thread has anything to do with Ubuntu. I certainly don't. I package GNUBG for Debian, where so far as I can tell it works fine. Ubuntu imports my Debian packages into Ubuntu, but it's not like they asked whether they could do that. They just do that routinely with all Debian packages. Not that I mind, at all, but I don't feel any particular ownership over their behavior on Ubuntu; that wasn't anything I ever signed on to support. I'll fix bugs when I can, because it's free software and all, but I have no Ubuntu systems and have no particular interest in running Ubuntu. I do keep an eye on the Ubuntu bug stream for the gnubg packages in case any of those issues affect Debian, but I don't feel any ownership of their bug handling process or any particular obligation to try to convince them they've imported buggy packages and shouldn't be including them. When I have available time to do QA, I expend those resources on Debian, since that's the project I'm actually part of. -- Russ Allbery (rra@...) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: How about Ubuntu guys look at real bugs on their platform
by Joseph Heled
::
Rate this Message:
I was not suggesting any changes. I was merely pointing out what I
would find the best behaviour from a bot. Others may disagree, or dispute the degree of annoyance to the 'user' -Joseph On 15 February 2012 12:11, Russ Allbery <rra@...> wrote: > Michael Petch <mpetch@...> writes: > >> If I were Russ, I wouldn't be bothering with a very low priority 5 like >> this. > > I'm happy to pass your answer back to the bug reporter and close out the > bug. I suspected something along those lines would be the answer, but > didn't want to put words in your mouth. > >> If someone want stop code it they can waste their time. I think Russ and >> Ubuntu folks should fix the big gaping Priority one catastrophic bug >> that really should have GNUBG pulled from that platform until >> fixed. That bug is the one that causes the mouse to freeze on that >> platform (Ubuntu 11.04+). > >> Right now, the bug in question is so catastrophic that it renders our >> product useless on Ubuntu if someone wants to view the analysis from the >> move list. > >> The bug doesn't exist on the current main Debian Wheezy or Sid releases. > >> If it were me, I would pull GNUBG from Ubuntu until it is resolved. > > I'm not entirely sure who this is aimed at. So far as I know, no one > involved in this thread has anything to do with Ubuntu. I certainly > don't. I package GNUBG for Debian, where so far as I can tell it works > fine. > > Ubuntu imports my Debian packages into Ubuntu, but it's not like they > asked whether they could do that. They just do that routinely with all > Debian packages. Not that I mind, at all, but I don't feel any particular > ownership over their behavior on Ubuntu; that wasn't anything I ever > signed on to support. I'll fix bugs when I can, because it's free > software and all, but I have no Ubuntu systems and have no particular > interest in running Ubuntu. > > I do keep an eye on the Ubuntu bug stream for the gnubg packages in case > any of those issues affect Debian, but I don't feel any ownership of their > bug handling process or any particular obligation to try to convince them > they've imported buggy packages and shouldn't be including them. When I > have available time to do QA, I expend those resources on Debian, since > that's the project I'm actually part of. > > -- > Russ Allbery (rra@...) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> > > _______________________________________________ > Bug-gnubg mailing list > Bug-gnubg@... > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: How about Ubuntu guys look at real bugs on their platform
by Michael Petch
::
Rate this Message:
On 14/02/2012 4:11 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm not entirely sure who this is aimed at. So far as I know, no one > involved in this thread has anything to do with Ubuntu. I certainly > don't. I package GNUBG for Debian, where so far as I can tell it works > fine. > I don't follow the package management politics on Debian/Ubuntu, I directed it at you because I had incorrectly asserted that as Debian Package maintainer that you possibly had some role in Ubuntu packaging as well. I incorrectly assumed this since you appear as subscribed on the Ubuntu bug list in the past and had answered queries there. The last one I remember was related to a bug I fixed with random.org. It does work fine under Debian Wheezy and Sid that I have tested, so in the environments you build for there is no issue. Here is the story, there is a reported bug specifically starting from Ubuntu 11.04 (And continued in 11.10) that has been reported to this mailing list and our bug tracking software since last November. I have no idea who has knowledge of this bug within the Ubuntu community. Relevant information is here: First Bug tracker entry: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?34864 This bug also came up on this list a number of times recently with new bug reports from Ubuntu users. Most recent one this week: http://old.nabble.com/gnubg-on-ubuntu-11.10-crashes-during-viewing-the-analysis-td33280869.html The bug is 100% reproducible, easy to produce, and very bad. I work on a pile of platforms. I investigated it (As well as Philippe Michel), and as of this moment we are at a loss. It seems to be something very specific to that environment. I have limited resources as well so can't worry about every platform issue. Russ, like you I focus primarily one the environments that I am concerned about the most. Windows, OSX and stable Debian. I have other OS'es installed (Like Ubuntu and the like) but don't have the time to deal with all the platforms (I wish I did). Sorry if my post was harsh towards you. I am directing this at those who maintain our packages on Ubuntu, and that clearly isn't you. My comment still stands though about my feelings towards this high priority bug on that platform. -- Michael Petch CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Ubuntu Desktop / GNUBG / Mouse Clicking Issue
by Michael Petch
::
Rate this Message:
Since I don't know what Ubuntu knows or doesn't, I created an account on
the Ubuntu site and generated a new GNUBG bug report there for this issue. See: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnubg/+bug/932455 -- Michael Petch CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: Ubuntu Desktop / GNUBG / Mouse Clicking Issue
by Russ Allbery
::
Rate this Message:
Michael Petch <mpetch@...> writes:
> Since I don't know what Ubuntu knows or doesn't, I created an account on > the Ubuntu site and generated a new GNUBG bug report there for this > issue. > See: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnubg/+bug/932455 Cool, thank you. I was going to suggest that was a good idea, but you beat me to it. :) Maybe there is someone else who will monitor the health of the package in Ubuntu and try to get to the bottom of what's going on. -- Russ Allbery (rra@...) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
WORKAROUND: Ubuntu Desktop / GNUBG / Mouse Clicking Issue
by Michael Petch
::
Rate this Message:
Howdy All,
After spending an evening in the debugger I accidentally stumbled upon a temporary solution to get GNUBG functional under Ubuntu 11.10 . The issue involves a feature of Ubuntu's desktop that I despise - those overlay scrollbars (scrollbars that popout past the edge of a window to save real estate inside a widget). For some reason the overlay scrollbars under Ubuntu 11.10 do not work with GNUBG for some *yet* unknown reason. If you want to turn overlay scrollbars off for just GNUBG so that launching from the menu works then do this from a command terminal: sudo nano /usr/share/applications/gnubg.desktop Modify the line that starts with Exec= and replace it with this new one: Exec=env LIBOVERLAY_SCROLLBAR=0 gnubg -w This should allow GNUBG tro run properly, and you will notice the scrollbars appear normally. ---------------------- For anyone who is interested in turning this feature off site wide, I found this tidbit by creating a new file: sudo nano /etc/X11/Xsession.d/80overlayscrollbars And putting this line into it: LIBOVERLAY_SCROLLBAR=0 You'll have to restart X or just reboot Ubuntu for this to take affect. -- Michael Petch CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd. OpenPGP FingerPrint=D81C 6A0D 987E 7DA5 3219 6715 466A 2ACE 5CAE 3304 _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
|
|
Re: How about Ubuntu guys look at real bugs on their platform
by Russ Allbery
::
Rate this Message:
Michael Petch <mpetch@...> writes:
> I don't follow the package management politics on Debian/Ubuntu, I > directed it at you because I had incorrectly asserted that as Debian > Package maintainer that you possibly had some role in Ubuntu packaging > as well. I incorrectly assumed this since you appear as subscribed on > the Ubuntu bug list in the past and had answered queries there. The last > one I remember was related to a bug I fixed with random.org. Not at all a problem. None of this is particularly obvious from the outside. I didn't take it personally. I do try to follow Ubuntu bugs since, well, it's my work even if it's running in a different context, and sometimes I can fix things, or at least confirm that they're fixed. The context is awkward and a bit confusing because of the fairly automated relationship between the packages. That also creates bug queues on the Ubuntu side that it's not clear anyone is really reading, when the package was imported into Ubuntu automatically and not through anyone's specific intent. > The bug is 100% reproducible, easy to produce, and very bad. I work on a > pile of platforms. I investigated it (As well as Philippe Michel), and > as of this moment we are at a loss. It seems to be something very > specific to that environment. I have limited resources as well so can't > worry about every platform issue. Oh, and really good work on finding the cause of the bug! That's a nice bit of debugging. > Russ, like you I focus primarily one the environments that I am > concerned about the most. Windows, OSX and stable Debian. I have other > OS'es installed (Like Ubuntu and the like) but don't have the time to > deal with all the platforms (I wish I did). Yeah, sounds familiar. :) > Sorry if my post was harsh towards you. I am directing this at those who > maintain our packages on Ubuntu, and that clearly isn't you. My comment > still stands though about my feelings towards this high priority bug on > that platform. It's quite okay. No harm done. I suspect that the answer to "who maintains our packages on Ubuntu" is actually "no one," sadly. I somewhat doubt that anything at all happens to them in Ubuntu other than importing the latest Debian package and praying it works. -- Russ Allbery (rra@...) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list Bug-gnubg@... https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
