Are there any sites providing optimized clients? -- PART II

The original thread can be found here -
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=31655

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Any work performed or produced as a result of use of the Materials cannot be performed or produced for the benefit of other parties for a fee, compensation or any other reimbursement or remuneration.

This could possibly impinge on seti/BOINC funding to UCB.

I don't see how, as long as the person using the compiler isn’t being paid to do so by UCB (or anyone else). But, as I’ve said before, IANAL.

I'm having trouble with CVS - I know someone posted how to get the enhanced CVS sources, the ones you get with the command from http://boinc.berkeley.edu/source_code.php are 4.xx. Can anyone paste the correct CVS checkout command again please? I'm too tired to wade through threads...

Regards,
Simon.

--edit
Never mind, found it by browsing the CVS web viewer.

cvs -d :pserver:anonymous:@alien.ssl.berkeley.edu:/home/cvs/cvsroot checkout -r setiathome_enhanced seti_boinc

FYI:

CVS sources compiled without real problems for me on Windows.

Someone forgot to remove a file from the project - amd64AnalyzeFuncs.cpp. It doesn't exist on the CVS anymore, but it's in the project file still.
Remove it, builds fine.

I will be testing this with my flags and ICC/IPP vs. my 5.15 builds and see if anything changes.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

and times, nothink

but times are ...

have you Comparisons with the original Client

Greetings from Germany NRW
Ulli

As soon as I have results, I'll post them here :o)

Default 5.12 vs. Default 5.15 vs. Default 5.17

VS

Cruncher 5.12 My 5.15 My 5.17.

All on the same host, so the comparison should be halfway fair.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

As soon as I have results, I'll post them here :o)

Default 5.12 vs. Default 5.15 vs. Default 5.17

VS

Cruncher 5.12 My 5.15 My 5.17.

All on the same host, so the comparison should be halfway fair.

Regards,
Simon.

No, because I don't have a free 2003 version (and the 2005 express version croaks on some not-so-clean syntax somewhere, I forget).

Someone mentioned a free GUI-less 2003 version that's around - since the command-line options are in Visual Studio, I'm pretty sure that could be used to build.

For anyone interested in having Microsoft licenses available for personal use, you should really check out Microsoft certification...hint hint. Stop pirating, start getting free stuff from MS! Exams are much less expensive than licenses, but licenses are included when you take exams. Edumacate yourself ;o)

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Ageless, that is exactly why I have not yet posted anything there.

I won't release things unless I'm sure about the license issues. Should I release anything, it will have been tested exhaustively on a number of different hosts beforehand.

I do want to make sure *everything* is as right as it could be before I take that step - can't speak for others trying their hand at optimizing.

Also, I have a couple of people as a test group. I won't risk a test build being less than perfect and getting distributed to lots of people, so I'm keeping it small for now.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Thanks again :o)

Well, after spending a few hours trying to get the CVS 5.17 sources to compile, I'm giving up on them for now.

Instead, I'll schedule a nice test run while I sleep - default vs. Crunch3r vs. mine on Windows, same on Linux, all for SSE2.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Okay, here is the first round of test results. Bear in mind a test run takes me around 1-2 hours all in all (with collating results and rebooting twice).
The chirp_limit has been adjusted (to 1/2.5) so the units take comparatively less time, or one run would take 12-20 hours.

testWU-1 (AR: 0.60488405578199)

Windows 32-Bit

Default 5.15 with graphics
23m 33s (1411 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
11m 30s (690 seconds) - 51.1% quicker

My 5.15 SSE2
11m 25s (685 seconds) - 51.5% quicker

Those 5 seconds difference are well within standard result variance, so I'd calll it a draw at this AR on Windows.

Linux 32-Bit

Default 5.12 (no X-Win installed, so no graphics? not sure)
19m 30s (1150 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
14m 16s (856 seconds) - 25.57% quicker
My 5.15 SSE2
12m 49s (769 seconds) - 33.13% quicker

--------------------------------

Linux vs. Windows

Default client
Linux is 18.5% quicker.

Crunch3rs 5.12
Windows is 19.4% quicker.

My 5.15 builds
Windows is 12.2% quicker.

So to sum things up, Windows does seem quicker at this AR with optimized clients, but slower with the default (due to the graphics? probably).

Next unit I'll test has an AR of ~0.44, so scaling should be different there.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Simon, that is some very nice work there. Thanks for your efforts, and everyone else who is working on this as well!

baracutio has been notified that not offering source code for stuff you're distributing is against the GPL.

He used to offer Crunch3r's clients but took them down after being asked.

However, you're correct - that optimized BOINC app should also have a source package available to accompany it. It is not an optimized cruncher, though, but an optimized BOINC client.

Be aware that only made a difference when claimed credit depended on benchmarks. It doesn't anymore. So the real difference between using those and the default ones is zero.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

From what I have read about licensing issues, is not legal to distribuite any optimized app withouth the sources.
Here are some optimized apps, but no sources:
http://realtec.dyndns.org/web/vbforum/showthread.php?t=1245

Thanks for the clarification Sarge!
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Thanks for the clarification Sarge!

Stats for second WU:

testWU-2 (AR: 0.4437317022742)

Windows 32-Bit

Default 5.15 with graphics
27m 37s (1657 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
13m 04s (784 seconds) - 52.7% quicker

My 5.15 SSE2
13m 10s (790 seconds) - 52.6% quicker

Those 6 seconds difference are again well within standard result variance, so I'd calll it a draw at this AR on Windows (between optimized clients), too.

Linux 32-Bit

Default 5.12 (no X-Win installed, so no graphics? not sure)
23m 04s (1384 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
16m 34s (994 seconds) - 28.2% quicker

My 5.15 SSE2
14m 52s (892 seconds) - 35.6% quicker

--------------------------------

Linux vs. Windows

Default client
Linux is 16.5% quicker.

Crunch3rs 5.12
Windows is 21.1% quicker.

My 5.15 builds
Windows is 11.4% quicker.

So the results seem to be pretty repeatable for the first two.
Next one coming right up.

Okay, here is the first round of test results. Bear in mind a test run takes me around 1-2 hours all in all (with collating results and rebooting twice).
The chirp_limit has been adjusted (to 1/2.5) so the units take comparatively less time, or one run would take 12-20 hours.

testWU-1 (AR: 0.60488405578199)

Windows 32-Bit

Default 5.15 with graphics
23m 33s (1411 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
11m 30s (690 seconds) - 51.1% quicker

My 5.15 SSE2
11m 25s (685 seconds) - 51.5% quicker

Those 5 seconds difference are well within standard result variance, so I'd calll it a draw at this AR on Windows.

Linux 32-Bit

Default 5.12 (no X-Win installed, so no graphics? not sure)
19m 30s (1150 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
14m 16s (856 seconds) - 25.57% quicker
My 5.15 SSE2
12m 49s (769 seconds) - 33.13% quicker

--------------------------------

Linux vs. Windows

Default client
Linux is 18.5% quicker.

Crunch3rs 5.12
Windows is 19.4% quicker.

My 5.15 builds
Windows is 12.2% quicker.

So to sum things up, Windows does seem quicker at this AR with optimized clients, but slower with the default (due to the graphics? probably).

Next unit I'll test has an AR of ~0.44, so scaling should be different there.

Regards,
Simon.

Stats for third WU:

testWU-4 (AR: 1.2796485198966)

Windows 32-Bit

Default 5.15 with graphics
10m 46s (646 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
4m 19s (259 seconds) - 59.9% quicker

My 5.15 SSE2
4m 17s (257 seconds) - 60.0% quicker

Those 2 seconds difference are again well within standard result variance, so I'd call it a draw at this AR on Windows (between optimized clients), too.

Linux 32-Bit

Default 5.12 (no X-Win installed, so no graphics? not sure)
8m 00s (480 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
5m 02s (302 seconds) - 37.1% quicker

My 5.15 SSE2
4m 45s (285 seconds) - 40.6% quicker

--------------------------------

Linux vs. Windows

Default client
Linux is 25.7% quicker.

Crunch3rs 5.12
Windows is 14.2% quicker.

My 5.15 builds
Windows is 9.8% quicker.

The same sort of scaling seems to apply, roughly.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Simon, are you planning on making your benchmark system available to the public at some point? I'm sure other people would be more than willing to help contribute benchmarks, not to mention that I'm kind of curious as to how a G5 running the Mac client stacks up. :P

Also, are these tests still being run on the 3.06 GHz P4 laptop you mentioned before?

Well, this all sounds very, very interesting to us all, but where are the clients to download and test this whole things for us all? ;)
____________
Aloha, Uli

No,

these are all being run on a Pentium-D 805 right now (stock).

Also, because the computer store didn't have two Corsair modules, it's only running single channel until they can restock. Still, it makes for very comparable results.

I installed Windows XP 32 and 64 Bit, and Linux 32 and 64 Bit (so a total of 4 Operating Systems) on this computer. This should enable me to do repeatable results without too much variance, because this system is doing nothing else.

Of course you can have the WUs I'm using to crunch these tests as well as the shell scripts I made to compare clients.

The WUs can be found here along with a little benchmark shell script.

Uli, I'll put together an SSE2 Linux package after I had some more sleep. Check the announcements thread tomorrow.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

(...) Uli, I'll put together an SSE2 package after I had some more sleep. Check the announcements thread tomorrow.

Bam.

'nuff said :o)
Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

During testing, I've found that the Linux default client I've been using to test doesn't contain graphics and is between 10 and 30% quicker than Windows with graphics!

If it's not too much of a stretch code-wise, it would really be a cool feature to be able to turn off the graphics via the BOINC manager, for example. Right now, if they're compiled into the client, they are ALWAYS drawn, not only when you're actually looking at them (when screensaver runs or you select "view graphics" in the manager).

It really seems a waste of perfectly good cycles even if you don't use an optimized client.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Bam.

'nuff said :o)
Regards,
Simon.

First of all, congratulations on releasing a client! I'm sure you've made a lot of people happy, and there will be even more happy people in the coming days... :)

If it's not too much of a stretch code-wise, it would really be a cool feature to be able to turn off the graphics via the BOINC manager, for example. Right now, if they're compiled into the client, they are ALWAYS drawn, not only when you're actually looking at them (when screensaver runs or you select "view graphics" in the manager).

It really seems a waste of perfectly good cycles even if you don't use an optimized client.

Wow, I hadn't realized this--just looked through the initialization code to confirm. Looks like I'm going to have to reissue my v6 clients to take this into account. And I thought I was being nice in addressing that tiny minority that wanted their optimized clients to have graphics as well...

To anyone wanting the Visual C++ Toolkit 2003 (The free command line version from Microsoft), I didn't see it on their web site anymore. Instead they are pointing to their Visual Studio 2005 Express Edition (also free). That is located at http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/]http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/. I believe the Visual C++ Toolkit 2003 also had some sort of conflict also. If anyone still wants it however, I will try to locate it on my backup cds. I may have thrown it though. :( If I find it, I'll probably have to give it to someone elso to host as my i-net connection is at work. I doubt my boss would appreciate it. <BIG EVIL GRIN>

No, because I don't have a free 2003 version (and the 2005 express version croaks on some not-so-clean syntax somewhere, I forget).

Someone mentioned a free GUI-less 2003 version that's around - since the command-line options are in Visual Studio, I'm pretty sure that could be used to build.

For anyone interested in having Microsoft licenses available for personal use, you should really check out Microsoft certification...hint hint. Stop pirating, start getting free stuff from MS! Exams are much less expensive than licenses, but licenses are included when you take exams. Edumacate yourself ;o)

Regards,
Simon.

Oops -

since some of you seem to be having trouble executing that binary on SSE2 systems, I must have mixed up some flags.

Since I recompiled what I had before (that worked on all SSE2 hosts) and thought I used the same script, it should have been okay.

But I think I switched -axWN to -xWN and that was what's wrong.
Silly mistake, nobody's perfect :o)

I'll update the binary in an hour or so when I get it recompiled.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Good Stuff, Simon.

Any idea as to when you will have WinXP SSE2 and SSE3 clients available?

I did not contact Eben yet.
Not because I don't think it's necessary but because I simply haven't found time yet.

However, at the Intel site, they mention SPECIFICALLY that the only operating system these free for personal non-com use packages are offered on is Linux. So that's a pretty clear statement (even though, like I said, you can manually download the necessary files and the license works).

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

The downloadable client package has been updated with an executable that should now really run on all SSE2-enabled systems.

The URL is still the same, but it now downloads a file called "setiathome-5.15-sse2-v2.tar.gz".

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

104 downloads and counting :o)

Wow. I didn't think it was gonna go that quickly after only being online for less than 16 hours...

So there were some more compatibility issues, namely: it wouldn't run on Linux 2.4 systems, only on 2.6.

That's now fixed, the links are the same, the package is updated. So have at it people :o) Bandwidth is not a problem.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Add one more download! Trying it on my workstation here at work. Dual core AMD64. It picked up 2 work units already in progress under the standard 5.12 client. this one and this one should be returned some time within the next few hours.

Ni!
____________
A member of The Knights Who Say NI!
For rankings, history graphs and more, check out:
My BOINC stats site

I'll be watching :o)

Ni!
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Just a note to optimizers. 5.17 isn't ready for prime time (or even beta) yet. I've got some code issues to deal with in the short term. In particular the x86_64 chirp routine is untested.

On the bright side, that means people who want to send in optimized code for specific processors have time to do so.

Eric
____________

EricVonDaniken,

to my knowledge he bought a license, and that's how :o)

Just my 0.02 bucks.

Thanks for the notice, Eric! (Korpela)
5.17 didn't seem to work too well no matter what I tried, so I gave up on it for now (CVS) until further notice. The apps are at 5.15, based on your source tarballs.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

I did not contact Eben yet.
Not because I don't think it's necessary but because I simply haven't found time yet.

However, at the Intel site, they mention SPECIFICALLY that the only operating system these free for personal non-com use packages are offered on is Linux. So that's a pretty clear statement (even though, like I said, you can manually download the necessary files and the license works).

Regards,
Simon.

Obviously, Crunch3r found some legal way of creating and distributing his optimized WinXP apps.

Perhaps asking him about it would be useful?

A litlle OT, but Akos had to pull his latest patches because of validation issues.
A discussion about running optimized or not has started in this thread.

Some people are leaving Einstein already.

Regards Hans


____________

From memory (and I could be wrong, it was a while ago) someone made a donation which allowed Crunch3r to either purchase it, or the donation was the license itself. I even believe it was specificly to allow the optimised apps to be made for SETI@home. This leads to the point that if someone donated to allow him to make the optimised SETI apps then isn't he showing a huge amount of bad form by removing them.

Live long and crunch.

Oi, 649 posts...

And about the donation and related questions...er...no idea, don't really want to comment, nothing good could come of it.

I had a different idea, which is to write to Intel directly (marketing or one the CEO's office) about supporting Seti@Home and giving a license to the project for the express purpose of offering optimized clients for everyone.

Not sure how that will go, I haven't written and sent that letter (yes, snail mail) yet, but I will.

If Intel doesn't want to do that, then I'd try a donation drive towards the same goal - not giving this licence to any one person but to the project.

I really don't believe, even though I spent lots of time doing what needed doing, that I am entitled to any recompensation. Sure, it would be nice, but noone asked me to, right?

I can only hope Intel notices my letter and is interested :o)
After all, there are a lot of us crunchers, and we all need hardware to crunch with...and the project could always use some more server hardware, too, but that's a different thing entirely (and I will not ask them for it in my letter...alluding to it maybe).

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

A litlle OT, but Akos had to pull his latest patches because of validation issues.
A discussion about running optimized or not has started in this thread.

Some people are leaving Einstein already.

Regards Hans

The Gas Giant

Sorry but this is old news. Crunch3r does programing as a part of "business" he purchases Software to allow him to work... In this case Seti BOINC benifited... If he had a PayPal Link to help defer costs for time he donated here then "fine" No One, Paid for His Licenses! He paid for them... The sad part is that all the "credit mongers" should have been the First to Step Forward to Donate Money... But then the should have also dontated to Seti! They were getting Prime Credit for Cost/Hour....

So at this point, it is go figure! Someone wrung the neck of the goose that laid golden eggs... I hope they enjoyed the meal... For me the whole affair was was very unappitizing...

From memory (and I could be wrong, it was a while ago) someone made a donation which allowed Crunch3r to either purchase it, or the donation was the license itself. I even believe it was specificly to allow the optimised apps to be made for SETI@home. This leads to the point that if someone donated to allow him to make the optimised SETI apps then isn't he showing a huge amount of bad form by removing them.

Live long and crunch.

I had a different idea, which is to write to Intel directly (marketing or one the CEO's office) about supporting Seti@Home and giving a license to the project for the express purpose of offering optimized clients for everyone.

Regards,
Simon.

Pappa: Like I said, I believe he paid for them :o) Enough drama.

and Hans, I believe that too.
Which is why I'm taking the time to try and do that right, or they'll just ignore me.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Simon

I wish you Luck! If you want a reference they you can give them my lowly al.setiboinc (at) Gmail.com addresss. I will be happy to add references and explain what is happening and how they "could" gain inroads into a "Sun Shop"...

From reading various BOINc Developers Froums, there are inroads into detecting the type of CPU to allow delivoring the correct Application according to the CPU type...

So Progress can be made, IF a Few people Try!

Oi, 649 posts...

And about the donation and related questions...er...no idea, don't really want to comment, nothing good could come of it.

I had a different idea, which is to write to Intel directly (marketing or one the CEO's office) about supporting Seti@Home and giving a license to the project for the express purpose of offering optimized clients for everyone.

Not sure how that will go, I haven't written and sent that letter (yes, snail mail) yet, but I will.

If Intel doesn't want to do that, then I'd try a donation drive towards the same goal - not giving this licence to any one person but to the project.

I really don't believe, even though I spent lots of time doing what needed doing, that I am entitled to any recompensation. Sure, it would be nice, but noone asked me to, right?

I can only hope Intel notices my letter and is interested :o)
After all, there are a lot of us crunchers, and we all need hardware to crunch with...and the project could always use some more server hardware, too, but that's a different thing entirely (and I will not ask them for it in my letter...alluding to it maybe).

Regards,
Simon.

I think the gist of it is not so much the stable versions don't pass muster, but rather they aren't certified for use under the study protocol.
Alinator

Well,

the whole problem for Akosf and with the Einstein apps is that they're closed source and he had only compiled code to optimize using manual assembly tuning.

The Seti@Home and BOINC clients are both GPL, the Einstein ones aren't. So I'm really not surprised (but sad for Akosf) that they decided to disallow (some of?) his apps.

And yeah, if you distribute a program, you should have a license for it...RTPatch isn't open source or free - but that's never stopped anyone from distributing it, heh...if you have a license, you're allowed to, as well - no idea whether he had one or not. There are free alternatives that are easy to use (even GUI-based).

So anyway, I've always just crunched for Seti, and that won't change anytime soon. No disrespect to other projects, but I'm staying right here :o)

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Brian

A portion went into the S5 Application, now he is looking at what is happening and going to work... So If you look and read there are many people working on it... For Seti that work is happening in Seti Beta...

A litlle OT, but Akos had to pull his latest patches because of validation issues.

Perhaps I just didn't sit down and really read what to do with the Einstein stuff, but it just seemed to be more complex than the "Average" user would be able to install. All the patching of .DAT files and whatnot... It shouldn't have been so public...and if patching of files was required then someone should've got an RTPatch license...IMHO.

I didn't bother with an optimized S5. Short run times for me were about 45 minutes with the long ones running at about 7.00 to 7.25 hours..on the stock app.

A litlle OT, but Akos had to pull his latest patches because of validation issues.
A discussion about running optimized or not has started in this thread.

Some people are leaving Einstein already.

Regards Hans

Hans

Sorry, You forgot one...

Thier Validator with the new Appilication could also be an issue... In Alpha/Beta it is a Bug! After Release it is an "un-documented feature."

I think the gist of it is not so much the stable versions don't pass muster, but rather they aren't certified for use under the study protocol.
Alinator

I don't know if this argument holds water. IMO their validator should take care of this.

There are other sources for erroneous results:

- faulty hardware
- errors in the official apps

Regards Hans

Hans, I believe that too.
Which is why I'm taking the time to try and do that right, or they'll just ignore me.

Regards,
Simon.

Simon

I wish you Luck! If you want a reference they you can give them my lowly al.setiboinc (at) Gmail.com addresss. I will be happy to add references and explain what is happening and how they "could" gain inroads into a "Sun Shop"...

From reading various BOINc Developers Froums, there are inroads into detecting the type of CPU to allow delivoring the correct Application according to the CPU type...

So Progress can be made, IF a Few people Try!

Hans, I believe that too.
Which is why I'm taking the time to try and do that right, or they'll just ignore me.

Regards,
Simon.

While you're at it, could you mention that I want a couple of woodcrests NOW :o)

Regards Hans

HI simon

Hi Pappa

Hi Hans

Pappa: Like I said, I believe he paid for them :o) Enough drama.

and Hans, I believe that too.
Which is why I'm taking the time to try and do that right, or they'll just ignore me.

Regards,
Simon.

To be honest i think the windows version will be faster.

But you're talking about your new client, which you won't release,right?

Actually I don't want to buy ipp for $199 and icc for $399.

Crunch3r,

I have a fully licensed copy of MS Visual C++ 2003, but my trial versions of IPP, ICC and the Intel Math Kernel Library just expired as well. I haven't purchased them because I am so new to it, that I couldn't get it to compile without a buttload of error messages and warnings in the compiler output. If you would be willing to release your source code to me, I would be willing to buy a fully licensed copy of ICC & IPP, compile it with your instructions, and send it back to you to release to the public. You and your other source code contributors can take FULL credit for the clients, and I would get to learn a few things in the process. If you would be interested in this arrangement, let me know. If all I would need is the ICC and IPP, I should be able to swing the cost in about 2 weeks. If I would also need the Math Kernel Library, then it will take about 3 or 4 weeks to get the funds.

Regards, Daniel.

That Sounds good to me.

The first thread used by TMR when trying to optimize a windows version with the Eval version is called "Compiling faster Windows client with Intel C++ compiler (and fftw?). It's an interesting read. This development sounds much like that one. TMR discusses licenses and such, there are even links to intel compiler forums, and many things that KWSN - Chicken of Angnor might find helpful.

Also, in the follow up thread called 2nd: Compiling faster Windows client with Intel C++ compiler (and fftw?), TMR Identifies the person/s who set him up with the license in this post.

Hope this helps

tony

Thanks a lot for the links!

Lots of useful info. Huge threads, too :o) It'll take me a while to skim over them ...

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

and the third thread is 3nd: Compiling faster Windows client with Intel C++ compiler (and fftw?)

and shortly after the 3rd thread came, New Linux client compiled with Intel C++ compiler?

then, compile a faster linux client using ipp instead of fftw

then, Will you make optimized Windows client if I give the source?,

then, "Legal' optimized client for Windows,

then, Oh heck, just search TMR's post from 383 days ago and sooner, I'll stop the list here, but it continues for a while.

tony

NOTE: these were posted in chronological order of posting

Tony

Thank You!

then, compile a faster linux client using ipp instead of fftw

then, Will you make optimized Windows client if I give the source?,

then, "Legal' optimized client for Windows,

then, Oh heck, just search TMR's post from 383 days ago and sooner, I'll stop the list here, but it continues for a while.

tony

NOTE: these were posted in chronological order of posting

Byron

Thank You!

HI simon

Hi Pappa

Hi Hans

Pappa: Like I said, I believe he paid for them :o) Enough drama.

and Hans, I believe that too.
Which is why I'm taking the time to try and do that right, or they'll just ignore me.

Regards,
Simon.

Some old history from ..... 30 Nov 2005 ... 13:37:48 UTC ...

To be honest i think the windows version will be faster.

But you're talking about your new client, which you won't release,right?

Actually I don't want to buy ipp for $199 and icc for $399.

Crunch3r,

I have a fully licensed copy of MS Visual C++ 2003, but my trial versions of IPP, ICC and the Intel Math Kernel Library just expired as well. I haven't purchased them because I am so new to it, that I couldn't get it to compile without a buttload of error messages and warnings in the compiler output. If you would be willing to release your source code to me, I would be willing to buy a fully licensed copy of ICC & IPP, compile it with your instructions, and send it back to you to release to the public. You and your other source code contributors can take FULL credit for the clients, and I would get to learn a few things in the process. If you would be interested in this arrangement, let me know. If all I would need is the ICC and IPP, I should be able to swing the cost in about 2 weeks. If I would also need the Math Kernel Library, then it will take about 3 or 4 weeks to get the funds.

Regards, Daniel.

That Sounds good to me.

the above was copied from here .............. Posted .. on ... 30 Nov 2005 13:37:48 UTC

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=23410#199350


Regards
Byron

OK one more, a shortcut to the posts of TMR are here. I started from the oldest but when I got to something like post 380 or 390 (383 days ago), I quit working forward

I don't know if this argument holds water. IMO their validator should take care of this.

There are other sources for erroneous results:

- faulty hardware
- errors in the official apps

Regards Hans

Very true, but then there is the case where 2 "faulty" test versions get teamed up, or a single FTV gets selected as the canonical. Since they went to an IR of 2, there's a pretty good chance that could happen.

I think they just want to limit the number of variables present when they post process the MSD at the end of the S5 run.

Alinator

Yeah,
thank Tetsuji for rescmp! Made my life a lot easier in testing result validity. Thanks again for sending me a link Hans.

In any case, it really seems there's some momentum gaining again here on the forums (as well as good will and helpful, friendly posts). Let's keep it up people :o)

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Yeah,
thank Tetsuji for rescmp! Made my life a lot easier in testing result validity. Thanks again for sending me a link Hans.

In any case, it really seems there's some momentum gaining again here on the forums (as well as good will and helpful, friendly posts). Let's keep it up people :o)

Regards,
Simon.

I've said it before:

I'm not going away (read: you ain't gettin' rid of me THAT easily! :P) anytime soon - and I'll keep trying to get Windows as well as Linux apps released (and ultimately to get them to everyone like outlined before).

It may all take a bit of time, but rest assured it will get done. 16000 hits in the first 24h can't be that wrong :o) Good bit of motivation. Almost 1000 unique visitors, too.

Regards,
Simon.

P.S.: I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house down! *grin* "a storm in a glass of water", as a german proverb goes.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

BTW keep plugging at it, my slugs desperately need help! ;-)

Oh dear... You're running K6 processors? Are they at least K6-2?

Ah... Well I have a K6-2/500 that's been sitting dormant for over 3 years now... The mb is really twitchy... I think it is an ASUS MVP3 chipset (or something like that). I picked it up because my DFI bit the dust, so I thought I'd try to get to AGP. The DFI was a workhorse (430TX chipset, overclocked to 6x83), while the ASUS board fussed about every timing...

Oi,

I used to have a P5-AB (non-ATX version) which worked really nicely and overclocked my K6-2 333 to 400+ nicely and stably.

Damn, that was long ago...96?97? Big step up from the P133 I had before, that's for sure....mmh, memories of my first 3D card, a Voodoo 2, and playing the first games in real 3D...

The P133 ran at 166 and was my first ever overclock ;o) Necessary overclock, too, because the Microprose F1 sim wouldn't run at full detail without skipping frames at 133...before 3D accelerators, that was.

Cheers,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

LOL, the K6/300 was my step up from a 486DX-66.

It felt like going from a garbage scow to a warp driven starship! :-)

My own personal equipment that is. ;-)

Alinator

When Crunch3r started he worked primarily with Linux/unix. Here's a quick link to his posts.

The first thread where I see made his windows version is Optmised Seti App, but there's not much here, then Optimized BOINC 5.2.7 for Windows and Linux from the 3rd week of November 2005, then !!! WANTED !!! OPTIMISED CLIENT -> WINDOWS x86 32bit or 64bit, then Optimized BOINC 5.2.13 for Windows, then BOINC 5.2.14 optimization on linux., then Part 2 - OPTIMISED CLIENT -> WINDOWS x86 32bit or 64bit

After this he stopped making optimized Boinc clients and went to SE to try and tweak the SE seti app. You might search those boards for more info.

tony

Thanks Tony!

I already read through most of the threads and found some helpful info there.

It also seems to jibe with what I read out of the Windows license stuff for the Intel packages - namely, that you can't really release stuff compiled with the trial version (and there is no non-com version on Windows according to the Intel page, only commercial trial versions which expire).

So that's why I decided to only release Linux for now, since my use and distribution classifies as personal and non-commercial according to the license distributed by Intel (and my understanding of it).

Barring further developments (I already posted about the as yet unsent snail mail letter), that won't change quickly. I have access to a commercial license but it ain't mine, so that's not an option. Having to ask people to download code, compile it for me then send it back each time just doesn't work, not to mention them maybe having issues and/or getting flak for their kind help.

So for now I'm mulling how exactly to word what I'm writing, who all to include, etc etc. as well as trying to figure out why my Linux MMX/SSE version doesn't want to run on AMD hosts (gives me "illegal instruction" when I try no matter what optimization level).

A Windows How-To is also in the works even if some of the tools necessary are not free (but they're cheap on eBay ;o) ).

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Yeah It was around '96 or so, I had a Gigabyte GA5AX that had the same ALi Aladdin V chipset and I got a K6-3 to 550MHz, I never was able to get It to 600MHz, but It ran. Seems like a long time ago, My how time passes when You're havin fun.

Well the two results I linked to above have been reported. I was the first to report so I'll have to wait a while to see them validated.

And in the meantime 2 more have finished:
346850557 and 346850627.

Looks like they took 4.3 hours or so. The initial "to completion" estimate was 7.5 hours.
____________
A member of The Knights Who Say NI!
For rankings, history graphs and more, check out:
My BOINC stats site

Well the two results I linked to above have been reported. I was the first to report so I'll have to wait a while to see them validated.

And in the meantime 2 more have finished:
346850557 and 346850627.

Looks like they took 4.3 hours or so. The initial "to completion" estimate was 7.5 hours.

<url=http://a.b.c>Name for Link</url>

Thanks!
Kind of sucks that you can only edit posts for one hour, sorry if I sounded patronizing :o)

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Well the two results I linked to above have been reported. I was the first to report so I'll have to wait a while to see them validated.

And in the meantime 2 more have finished:
346850557 and 346850627.

Looks like they took 4.3 hours or so. The initial "to completion" estimate was 7.5 hours.

And thanks again Alex Kan!

He has released a version of his OS X G4/G5 optimized clients without graphics. This should make Macs even faster :o)

Kudos and hats off to him, as usual.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Just finished another. Looking at my results I see it claimed exactly the same credit as a work unit I finished with the standard client right before I switched which I assume means they are the same AR?

stock client = 11,615 seconds and optimized = 7,660 seconds. In both cases, credit claimed was 31.13
____________
A member of The Knights Who Say NI!
For rankings, history graphs and more, check out:
My BOINC stats site

The AR is exactly the same on those two results, yes.

You'll notice different sorts of speedups with different ARs. The ones that take longest seem to be the quickest compared to the default client.

I'll shortly be removing my optimized apps for a couple of WUs on my hosts so I can get an idea how it looks.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Around 900 dollars AFAIK, but I haven't checked closely. Sadly, the licenses are time-limited, I believe that's for one year and includes ICC, IPP and MKL (the latter two being library packages).

Intel pricing page

Also don't forget both Linux and Windows (and maybe even OS X, for X86-based Macs) are required, so that doubles/triples normal license costs.

--edit
Intel Compiler for Linux - $399
Intel Compiler for Windows - $399
Intel Compiler for OS X - $399

IPP - $199
MKL - $399 (maybe not necessary, but probably faster than fftw).

From the pricing page, it seems that all supported OS flavours are included when you buy one license for the library packages. The compiler has to be licensed once per OS.

There's a promotional MacOS package available that includes Compiler, IPP and MKL and costs $549. Since the libraries seem to license cross-OS, that might be the cheapest path overall.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

No, the source code is your's to do with as you see fit.

The license only applies once you run it through the compiler and wish to release for public use.

I guess that was the point Maverick was making earlier, he can still work on optimizing with the Intel products, but he can't release them anymore because his license expired.

Alinator

<edit> On second thought, there might be a problem with providing the exact config files for the compiler, but I would think there's nothing wrong with including a text "crib" sheet to help folks along.

So someone could release there optimized source material with some instructions on compiling and when to get the compilers(free?) and they wouldn't be breaking any rules. :)
Now just wish i know how to do all that. I doubt compileing is as easy as all that.

EricVonDaniken,

to my knowledge he bought a license, and that's how :o)

Regards,
Simon.

A= can you verify that so we are sure of what thw truth is?

B= how much does a license cost?

Around $900 AFAIK, but I haven't checked closely. Sadly, the licenses are time-limited, I believe that's for one year and includes ICC, IPP and MKL (the latter two being library packages).

Intel pricing page

Also don't forget both Linux and Windows (and maybe even OS X, for X86-based Macs) are required, so that doubles/triples normal license costs.

--edit
Intel Compiler for Linux - $399
Intel Compiler for Windows - $399
Intel Compiler for OS X - $399

IPP - $199
MKL - $399 (maybe not necessary, but probably faster than fftw).

From the pricing page, it seems that all supported OS flavours are included when you buy one license for the library packages. The compiler has to be licensed once per OS.

There's a promotional MacOS package available that includes Compiler, IPP and MKL and costs $549. Since the libraries seem to license cross-OS, that might be the cheapest path overall.

Regards,
Simon.

I find it hard to believe that Crunch3r was paying $900 US every year just so he could make BOINC and s@h optimizations!

Something does not make sense here. How is Berkeley making WinXP SW using the Intel stuff? How is MIT (FFTW)?

There has to be some form of academic/non-commercial/non-profit site licensing scheme available; and most likely one that is not time-bombed.

There are far more WinXP hosts than Linux hosts running BOINC, so it seems fairly important that we find a way to make those hosts run a effeciently and effectively as possible.

And I believe you'd be wrong Eric -

where do you see any inkling that Berkeley have even used any of the Intel packages themselves? The official client is compiled using GCC(Linux) and Microsoft Visual C++ (Windows) and NOT using Intel's package.

No, I do not believe that Berkeley or Seti@Home has a license for them.

And yes, it seems that Crunch3rs license was paid for using donations via paypal for at least a part of the cost. I haven't asked for anything similar because I don't think it's the right way.

TMR said his license ran out (he also found a sponsor) - so if only the support packages run out, he should actually still be able to release things with it. That also would alleviate some of the licensing cost (the recurring part), obviously.

I agree that there is only a problem releasing Apps on Windows right now BUT - that only goes for me. The project itself cannot use the personal free for non-commercial tools, namely because it's not a person as such.

So to use them, they would definitely need a License for Linux, too.

There are of course academic license programs available (just check their site), for which the project may qualify. In any case, that is something that I can neither influence nor do for them - all I can do, as promised, is write to Intel and see whether they would like to help us out.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

On 6/16/06, Charles Elliott wrote:

> Why don't you use the Intel compiler and libraries? You
> would not have to do much, if any, re-writing as it can
> produce runtime versions that pick and choose what instructions
> to use based on the capabilities of the CPU.

I don't think the compiler actually does what you are suggesting here.
(I'm prepared to be convinced otherwise, though). The last version I
tried didn't (a couple years ago).

> Moreover, in the studies I have read the Intel tools are the
> best in the industry and produce the fastest executables.

Most of the time we have to develop to the most common tools rather
than the fastest. The cost in my time required to switch compilers is
far larger than the cost of the compiler. GCC, OTOH, works everywhere
on every platform.

Eric

the above was copied from here ............


http://www.ssl.berkeley.edu/pipermail/boinc_opt/2006-June/000764.html

Thanks Byron,

I'm subscribed to that list already :o)

Actually, you can now do exactly what Eric Korpela said in that message you couldn't, which is have one executable that combines optimization for a couple of platforms (didn't use to be possible but now works).

The relevant compiler switches on Windows are /QaX and /QxX where X is either K, W, N or B (K-> P3/SSE, W ->Generic SSE2, N -> P4 SSE2, B -> P4 SSE3). So you can also combine more than one to make it look like /QaKWNB, which would make a monolithic executable that's optimized from P3 upwards and executes everywhere.

It'll be larger than the original, of course, and it has about a 3% performance penalty vs. a "pure" optimized binary. Compared to the default, though, that's still massively quicker.

A point to remember, to be sure.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

The official client is compiled using GCC(Linux) and Microsoft Visual C++ (Windows) and NOT using Intel's package.
...
Simon.

Well,

be that as it may - the Seti@Home project is a separate entity and I don't think its entitled to use Berkeley's licenses. They may of course have a deal with Intel in place, but that's really neither here nor there. Your friend may be married to a Supermodel, but does that mean she's going to sleep in your bed? :o) (no answers please :P)

I do agree that this problem is only going to worsen (like you said, optimized SSE code vs. traditional FPU code performance and similar things), and that the most favourable solution would be to offer a client that's as efficient as possible to EVERYONE.

Retaining users and making the most efficient use of the donated CPU time should also be on top of our list of things to do, so I'm with you there.

I'll repeat what I said before - as I have zero experience dealing with the "parallel path" (the FSF?), so feel free to jump in - I'm sure you can explain as coherently to them as to us what this is all about.

For my part, I'm about to finish a draft of my letter, which I'll be sending to Eric Korpela asking whether it's objectionable to the project in that form or not. I don't want to barge ahead without him/the project staff at least knowing what's happening.

I'll also post it (or a link to a copy of it) here.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

As to Windows binaries,

I just checked the license for Intel's evaluation versions, and it has this to say:

EVALUATION LICENSE: If you are using the Materials under the control of an Evaluation license, you as an individual may use the Materials only for internal evaluation purposes and only for the term of the evaluation time period, which is controlled by the license key code for the Materials. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY ELSEWHERE IN THIS AGREEMENT, YOU MAY NOT DISTRIBUTE ANY PORTION OF THE MATERIALS, AND THE APPLICATION AND/OR PRODUCT DEVELOPED BY YOU MAY ONLY BE USED FOR EVALUATION PURPOSES AND ONLY FOR THE TERM OF THE EVALUATION PERIOD. You may install copies of the Materials on an unlimited number of computers provided that you are the only individual using the Materials and only one copy of the Materials is in use at any one time. A separate license is required for each additional use and/or individual user in all other cases. Intel will provide you with a license code key that enables the Materials for an Evaluation license. If you are an entity, Intel grants you the right to designate one individual within your organization to have the sole right to use the Materials in the manner provided above.

Er,

I'll be the first to point out I might be wrong about the non-com versions for Windows.

The same license states, a paragraph before (I should have looked and recognized this earlier):

NONCOMMERCIAL-USE LICENSE: If you are using the Materials under the control of a Noncommercial-Use license, you as an individual may use the Materials only for non-business use where you receive no fee, salary or any other forms of compensation. The Materials may not be used for any other purpose, whether "for profit" or "not for profit." Any work performed or produced as a result of use of the Materials cannot be performed or produced for the benefit of other parties for a fee, compensation or any other reimbursement or remuneration. You may install copies of the Materials on an unlimited number of computers provided that you are the only individual using the Materials and only one copy of the Materials is in use at any one time. A separate license is required for each additional use and/or individual user in all other cases. Intel will provide you with a license code key that enables the Materials for a Noncommercial-Use license. If you obtained a time-limited Noncommercial-Use license, the duration (time period) of your license and your ability to use the Materials is limited to the time period of the obtained license, which is controlled by the license key code for the Materials. If you are an entity, Intel grants you the right to designate one individual within your organization to have the sole right to use the Materials in the manner provided above.

I will not release stuff that I know to be taking advantage of a legal technicality (requiring people to confirm an EULA that makes them promise to use it only until trial expiration and then delete would put me in the clear, legally...but not ethically).

Thats not a license condition, but a distribution condition (technicality, but still).

And it's not where I want to go anyway :o)
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

EricVonDaniken,

to my knowledge he bought a license, and that's how :o)

Regards,
Simon.

A= can you verify that so we are sure of what thw truth is?

B= how much does a license cost?

If you want to get in touch with me (for example to get sources and instructions how to compile them), contact me at simon <insert funny sign here> zadra.org.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

License is found at Intel web site - I just purchased it, cost of about $600.00 USD for the compiler, distribution, and Primatives.

Second that :o)
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

I will not release stuff that I know to be taking advantage of a legal technicality (requiring people to confirm an EULA that makes them promise to use it only until trial expiration and then delete would put me in the clear, legally...but not ethically).

Sounds like that might also conflict with the GPL for the original sources, which forbids the imposition of further conditions on licensees.

<edit>Let me add that although I’m a Mac-oriented person and therefore not particularly interested in Windows or Linux optimizations, I congratulate you on the circumspect and methodical manner in which you’ve been proceeding (according to what I’ve seen ‘from the sidelines’) with respect to both testing for validity (protecting the potential scientific results) and investigating legal issues (protecting the project & its volunteers).</edit>

Craziness.

The best way to solve the problem is for Berekeley and/or BOINC to get the right licensing.

Frankly, I'd bet Berkeley does have a site Intel license for these tools and we just do not know it.

I'd like to see someone try and run Linux on a 6502 cpu with 48k ram. :D ;)

I'd like to see someone try and run Linux on a 6502 cpu with 48k ram. :D ;)

Easy.

Write an emulator for a more recent CPU (ARM, etc..) and use your disk drive as main memory :o)

Just install a tiny linux distro when you're done.

Regards Hans

Easy? It would have to be all in Machine language, As the 6502 can only address 48k of ram and was a 1.79MHz cpu.

Showing my age here... It could actually address 64K RAM native (though early machines came with a whopping 4K RAM, like the original Apple ][, not the ][+ or even the //e... LOL). The 6502 was later tricked into addressing 128K of RAM by "bank switching". It was originally a 1.00 MHz CPU, though later iterations got up to a whopping 3.6 MHz (TransWarp Accelerator).

The Apple //gs used to run a C-Shell and programming environment based on unix with a 2.8MHz 65816 (16-bit offspring of the 6502). It was called GNO, for Gno's Not Orca. It could address 8 MB RAM I believe. There was even one accessible via telnet at one point. It actually compiled and ran Mines of Moria (old text-based mapping adventure game) quite well. I solved it and killed the Balrog and thus survived to rule the Mines. But yes, number crunching of the type we do with BOINC would have been years-long ventures for a single WU, if limitations of cache and memory addressing were worked around.

Of course the 6502 can go to 64k, Without an OS loaded that is and the Atari 400/800 OS was about 12k, The last Atari XE could go to 128k of course, But Apple was the only company to use the 65816 cpu, Atari never thought It was worth bothering with.

The "parallel path" is that if Intel's stuff really is making code that is 2-3x faster for SWAR than g++/gcc, that's a Problem the FSF compiler folks should care a great deal about.

testWU-2 (AR: 0.4437317022742)

Windows 32-Bit

Default 5.15 with graphics
27m 37s (1657 seconds)

Crunch3r 5.12 SSE2
13m 04s (784 seconds) - 52.7% quicker

My 5.15 SSE2
13m 10s (790 seconds) - 52.6% quicker

Simon (KWSN), I've been following your work with great interest, but I only have Athlon XPs (so, no SSE2) or higher... Any thoughts on doing SSE or 3DNow! optimized apps sometime? Or are those somehow not applicable? Thanks
____________

Kung Fu and Powerlifting

Josef,

it should be noted that the tests on Linux were with a client that had no graphics and DID go faster. Hence the smaller speedup of standard vs. optimized on Linux - see my benchmark posts.

I had no graphics-less Windows version to test with, so that's why the tests used this version - which I got via BOINC, so it's the one everyone is using.

Also be aware that these times do not scale to all ARs. On some the speedup vs. unoptimized is close to 3x, so that's not entirely untrue. On average, I'd say it's about 30-50% faster on most WUs.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Josef (and others):

Benchmark posts
That one and the next one have some results you can use to compare. They're a bit tough to find in that long thread.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

I agree, Besides a 486 is old, Maybe not as old as a 6502 cpu, But It's old and I'd like to see someone try and run Linux on a 6502 cpu with 48k ram. I don't think crunching or what ever is even possible on something that old. :D ;)

EricVonDaniken,

to my knowledge he bought a license, and that's how :o)

Regards,
Simon.

A= can you verify that so we are sure of what thw truth is?

B= how much does a license cost?

License is found at Intel web site - I just purchased it, cost of about $600.00 USD for the compiler, distribution, and Primatives.

EricVonDaniken,

to my knowledge he bought a license, and that's how :o)

Regards,
Simon.

A= can you verify that so we are sure of what thw truth is?

B= how much does a license cost?

License is found at Intel web site - I just purchased it, cost of about $600.00 USD for the compiler, distribution, and Primatives.

This thread may interest you. It contains a link to detailed instructions for Windows (complete with Screenshots) and a source code package you can use to get started.

Regards,
Simon.

De rien!

So far, the source package hasn't been downloaded, but I'm reasonably sure that will change. The Linux source package was downloaded 29 times already, the SSE2-optimized Linux client 205 times.

Regards,
Simon.
____________
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Hi, KWSN-CHicken of Angnor!

I followed your link to the instruction for windows to make my own compiled client. So far no problem, but when I unpacked your file, containing boinc and seti_boinc a password was needed for some files ???

So, are these protected files necessary or what is about this password?

Edit: It's ok now, it was just a lag of diskspace...
____________