I've recently started looking at the 3d code again - I stopped as gtk3
opengl support isn't great.  Gtk4 is supposed to be better, so I'm
skipping gtk3 and going to have a go getting it working properly with
gtk4.  I've no idea how close the main code is to working with gtk4 but
we'll see...

Jon

On Wed, 25 Feb 2026 at 22:44, Todd Doucet <[email protected]> wrote:

> Re the gtk3 support, if there is an active maintainer I'd be happy to test
> patches for it.  Respond via email if so.
>
> Re the 3D board support not working, my *hunch* is that it is a coordinate
> issue involving the fact that I have a 5K monitor and UI scaling.  So I
> might be a good test case for "modern" display issues.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 10:25 AM Todd Doucet <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Francesco,
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out that the gtk3 support is still maturing.  I built
>> with gtk2 and indeed that fixes the major glitches.  (For completeness,
>> though, I'll note that the checker movement is still *slightly* glitchy,
>> but the effect is ephemeral and you have to be really sensitive to it to
>> notice the shards of checkers being displayed and then covered up.  Not a
>> huge deal, but it is there.)
>>
>> The stock package for gnubg on Linux Mint also uses gtk3 and exhibits
>> similar problems.   I had built it in order to try out the 3d board, which
>> is not enabled in that stock build.  But that doesn't work with the mouse
>> on my setup, and it is not important to me anyway.
>>
>> What IS important to me, and what gtk3 provides, is respect for desktop
>> themes, in particular Dark Mode.   The gtk2 build of gnubg insists on
>> showing the move history in a blindingly-bright white window, which makes
>> the game basically unplayable at night on a computer set up in dark mode
>> with an appropriate board.  While this might sound a bit picky, I think it
>> is important if gnubg doesn't want to fully commit to being a relic.
>>
>> Anyway, I have attached to this email the match file for the scoring
>> issue I described.  (I'm not sure if it will make it to the mailing list,
>> but you said you'd like to see it so here it is.)   As you can see, there
>> are four games, and the gammon I described was played to completion on game
>> 3, but the fourth game seems to also be called game 3, and at least on my
>> setup gnubg is not scoring the gammon.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 1:00 AM Francesco Ariis <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Todd,
>>>
>>> Il 24 febbraio 2026 alle 17:04 Todd Doucet ha scritto:
>>> > PS:  I also find that 2D board animation is glitchy on my Linux Mint
>>> > system, and 3D board animation is extremely glitchy.  I spent a day
>>> > debugging it with chat-gpt's help and our conclusion was that it was
>>> > probably a gnubg problem, not a graphics stack problem.  I disabled
>>> the 3d
>>> > board entirely from the build that seemed to make the 2d board more
>>> > stable.  All told, it is pretty disappointing to have glitchy
>>> rendering in
>>> > 2025, although I suppose one could blame it on the display stack.  But
>>> > honestly, not likely.  Welcome to 1995.
>>>
>>> I had a similar problem.  Philippe Michel correctly diagnosed it:
>>>
>>>     https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnubg/2025-08/msg00004.html
>>>
>>> tl;dr: compile with Gtk2
>>>
>>>
>>> Regarding the main part of the message:
>>>
>>> Il 24 febbraio 2026 alle 17:04 Todd Doucet ha scritto:
>>> > The bug occurred during a 5-point match.  I was trailing 0-3 to 5, and
>>> I
>>> > had cubed to 2 and gnubg accepted.   I gammoned gnubg on that game, the
>>> > final roll was 2-2 and I had two checkers on each of the ace and
>>> deuce.  So
>>> > a forced move, a gammon, and it should be 4-1 crawford.
>>> >
>>> > At the beginning of the next game, I noticed that gnubg thought the
>>> score
>>> > was still 0-3 to 5, but it also thought that the game was crawford.
>>> >
>>> > […]
>>> >
>>> > I don't subscribe to this list but if somebody wants a copy of the
>>> match
>>> > file, email me directly and I will send it.
>>>
>>> I am sure many of us are interested!  I do not know if you can post
>>> attachments to the list, but I would like to take a look at it
>>> —F
>>>
>>

Reply via email to