[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] slow gui (strace)

From: Achim Mueller
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] slow gui (strace)
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 16:26:05 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

* Joern Thyssen wrote on 27 Nov 2003:

> On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 02:44:59PM +0100, Achim Mueller wrote
> > Hi folks,
> > 
> > concerning my problem with the slow gui (happens on three pc with
> > different architecture, but all installed with suse-9.0 or gentoo
> > linux) I did an strace. 
> Maybe gentoo and suse include badly optimised GTK+ libraries?

Or different versions than the other distributions?!

> If it works fine on, say Redhat, then it's hardly a problem in gnubg?

It works fine on debian (without 3d, haven't 3d checked yet).

> > As mentioned before this doesn't happen with
> > debian. The output is available at 
> > http://www.acepoint.de/GnuBG/strace_gnubg.tar.gz. I'd be glad if
> > someone takes a look at it.
> I've no idea on how to interprete the strace output, but one question
> came to mind: does the GUI slow on both 2D and 3D boards?

3d doesn't work anymore (NVidia issue?!). Jon is working on that.

> For the mailing list readers:
> Would output from gprof be more interesting, i.e., would that reveal
> where the additional time is spend? I didn't follow the thread closely,
> but as far as I remember Achim said that CPU time was identical, but wall
> time was much longer (Achim, can you confirm?)! Will the wall time be
> attributed to the correct routine in a gprof experiment?

How can I check this?



achim mueller, anne-frank-str. 25, D-48431 rheine
+49 (0)5971 83767, +49 (0)163 8458340
pgp/gnupg key: 1024D/5DF3A722 (wwwkeys.de.pgp.net)

Attachment: pgpmDP9FfFjtV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]