Re: [Bug-gnubg] snapshots broken

[Zulli, Louis P]

Latest snapshot is fine.

On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 07:55:06 +0100
 Mueller Achim <address@hidden> wrote:
> I'll check it later, just on the way to the office.
>
> Ciao
>
> Achim
>
>
> Am 11.11.2008 um 12:43 schrieb Christian Anthon:
>
> > Today's snapshot appears to be broken. Achim?
> >
> > Christian.
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Zulli, Louis P  
> > <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > Thanks, Christian. I was about to download and build the latest  
> > > snapshot,
> > > but stopped when I saw that the reported size of the file was much  
> > > smaller
> > > than usual:
> > >
> > > 11-Nov-2008 04:33  3.4M
> > >
> > > Is the snapshot file corrupted?
> > >
> > > Louis
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:15:53 +0100
> > > "Christian Anthon" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > Hi Louis,
> > > >
> > > > I found the problem, it should be fixed in the source now.
> > > >
> > > > Christian.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Christian Anthon
> > > > <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Louis,
> > > > >
> > > > > it is a bug in the code that finds legal targets for moving a  
> > > > > chequer
> > > > > (gnubg basically interprets your move as 3/2 2/off) . The bug was
> > > > > already there in 0.14, but nobody noticed until now, since I  
> > > > > recently
> > > > > fixed a bug in the "click and move" code by adding a check for  
> > > > > legal
> > > > > targets.
> > > > >
> > > > > Christian.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Zulli, Louis P <address@hidden 
> > > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > I created the attached position to demonstrate a gnubg behavior  
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > perplexes me. I have not attempted to isolate the exact feature  
> > > > > > of the
> > > > > > position that triggers this behavior, but perhaps this one  
> > > > > > example will
> > > > > > suffice for now. I do not know if this is a bug, or a feature  
> > > > > > whose
> > > > > > necessity escapes me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I roll 3-1 in the attached position. I click on the stone on my  
> > > > > > 3-point,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > it is borne off. I click on the stone on my 2-point, and it  
> > > > > > won't move!
> > > > > > (Actually, it wobbles in place.) I need to drag it to the 1- 
> > > > > > point, even
> > > > > > though it can only go there. Why? What am I missing?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS---In the same position, if I click first on the stone on the  
> > > > > > 2-point,
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > moves to the 1-point. If I then click on the other stone, it is  
> > > > > > borne
> > > > > > off.
> > > > > > So the order of the actions matters.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bug-gnubg mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg