PFGW 3.2.2 has been Released

[rogue]

I have release PFGW 3.2.2. The only fix to this release is to fix the bug I introduced with +1 forms and fast modular reduction. You can d/l Windows and MacIntel buildsfrom the following links.

Wnidows
MacIntel

I will let you know when a linux build is available.

I am not aware of any other bugs with PFGW at this time. If you find any, please let me know.

Please d/l with Safari or Firefox since IE seems to have problems with these files.

--Mark

[mdettweiler]

Is there a way to make PFGW default to logging its output to pfgw.log (like when the -l option is used)? I've forgotten that on a couple of occasions, including just today where I wasted about a day or two's worth of work, and would have wasted even more if I hadn't noticed when I stopped the client to upgrade to version 3.2.2. At any rate, it can't hurt to have it log results to file by default, so it may be worthwhile to make this the default in future versions.

[TimSorbet]

Originally Posted by mdettweiler

Is there a way to make PFGW default to logging its output to pfgw.log (like when the -l option is used)? I've forgotten that on a couple of occasions, including just today where I wasted about a day or two's worth of work, and would have wasted even more if I hadn't noticed when I stopped the client to upgrade to version 3.2.2. At any rate, it can't hurt to have it log results to file by default, so it may be worthwhile to make this the default in future versions.

With WinPFGW you can use the Output > Verbose > File option to enable logging (without needing the -l option). I don't think there is such an option for the command line version.

[rogue]

Originally Posted by mdettweiler

Is there a way to make PFGW default to logging its output to pfgw.log (like when the -l option is used)? I've forgotten that on a couple of occasions, including just today where I wasted about a day or two's worth of work, and would have wasted even more if I hadn't noticed when I stopped the client to upgrade to version 3.2.2. At any rate, it can't hurt to have it log results to file by default, so it may be worthwhile to make this the default in future versions.

Sorry, but probably not. There are a lot of users who don't care about residues of composites so they wouldn't that output.

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by Mini-Geek

With WinPFGW you can use the Output > Verbose > File option to enable logging (without needing the -l option). I don't think there is such an option for the command line version.

I don't use WinPFGW most of the time; I generally use the command line version so that I can string up another command (say, a PRPnet client) to keep the computer busy if PFGW find a prime or finishes its ranges and stops when I'm not at the computer.

Originally Posted by rogue

Sorry, but probably not. There are a lot of users who don't care about residues of composites so they wouldn't that output.

Ah, I see. What about an option in pfgw.ini?

[rogue]

Originally Posted by mdettweiler

Ah, I see. What about an option in pfgw.ini?

Possibly, but who creates the pfgw.ini file before running PFGW?

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by rogue

Possibly, but who creates the pfgw.ini file before running PFGW?

Ah, I didn't think of that. Never mind, I guess that wouldn't work.

[kar_bon]

Originally Posted by rogue

Possibly, but who creates the pfgw.ini file before running PFGW?

if you running pfgw or WinPFGW without any input an .ini file is created automatically.
so (closing WinPFGW) you can insert such a setting manually to the .ini and restart again with input!

[rogue]

Originally Posted by kar_bon

if you running pfgw or WinPFGW without any input an .ini file is created automatically.
so (closing WinPFGW) you can insert such a setting manually to the .ini and restart again with input!

Why would anyone want to do that? It would be more work than supporting any command line switches. Besides after restarting using -l would be easier than editing a file.

[lfm]

Originally Posted by rogue

Why would anyone want to do that? It would be more work than supporting any command line switches. Besides after restarting using -l would be easier than editing a file.

depends..... if you think like a command line user then command line options are easier. If you think like a windows/mouse user perhaps it is easier to edit a file. many windows-mouse users have no idea how to add command line switches.

[rogue]

Originally Posted by lfm

depends..... if you think like a command line user then command line options are easier. If you think like a windows/mouse user perhaps it is easier to edit a file. many windows-mouse users have no idea how to add command line switches.

But the GUI version has a command line. That's where you specify the input to be tested. That would still be easier for a user than editing an ini file. PFGW also has a menu option for logging to a file. That also would be easier than editing an ini file.