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

Re: ppracer much slower than tuxracer



Hi!

[ adding the bug and it's submitter to CC, I'm to lazy to send out the
  nearly same mail twice ;) ]

* Marty <martyb@ix.netcom.com> [050524 21:44]:
> I am running Debian testing which has recently transitioned from tuxracer
> to ppracer 0.3.1.
> 
> The game has slowed by at least an order of magnitude, based on
> side-by-side testing with a backed-up copy of old tuxracer.  The results
> are consistent after trying several graphics cards.  With old Tuxracer I
> get 20-30fps, while ppracer gives 2-5fps.  (The tested cards refresh 
> glxgears
> at 250-730fps).
> 
> These results were seen on older hardware (K6-3 450MHz w/first gen 3D
> graphics cards).  I can understand how this problem might not be as 
> noticable
> on fast hardware.

As the maintainer of ppracer I must confess, that I indeed didn't tested
it on older hardware.  Sorry.

But - as explained in /usr/share/doc/tuxracer/README.Debian - it didn't
seemed to be usefull to us, to ship sarge with unmainted code (which
proved at least once not even compilable on a recent sarge system).

However, I'm aware of that problem (it has even it's own bug report -
see http://bugs.debian.org/310573), and I'm in contact with the upstram
author, to see, what the problem could be, and if it is solvable on a
per user basis.


For the moment, the only solution I know of, is to fetch the old
0.61-6.4 package from [1]  (don't forget the tuxracer-data package!),
and set both on hold, so they won't be upgraded again.


Yours sincerely,
  Alexander

Links:
  1: http://snapshot.debian.net/archive/2005/04/27/debian/pool/main/t/tuxracer/


-- 
http://learn.to/quote/
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: