https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/releases/tag/sf_17.1
https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/releases?q=prerelease%3Atrue
@entropyfoe
Package: stockfish
Version: 17-0.1~mx23+1
Architecture: amd64
Maintainer: Steven Pusser <stevep@mxlinux.org>
Installed-Size: 76891
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.34), libgcc-s1 (>= 3.4), libstdc++6 (>= 12)
Suggests: polyglot, xboard | scid
Homepage: https://stockfishchess.org
Priority: optional
Section: games
Filename: pool/test/s/stockfish/stockfish_17-0.1~mx23+1_amd64.deb
Size: 61066876
SHA256: 16bb3bf78cb7132d2b4c64cbfc2bac66f906ab522a3de52e94225df014518211
SHA1: b548fb910f8dc3c476ee8a547352ed666ebd6363
MD5sum: 1f685e75dcb695eff28277d47845c105
Description: strong chess engine, to play chess against
free chess engine derived from Glaurung 2.1. It is a chess engine, so it
requires an UCI (universal chess interface) compatible GUI like XBoard
(with PolyGlot), eboard, Jose, Arena or scid in order to be used comfortably.
It is the strongest open source chess engine by october 2009 in the
"computer chess rating list" CCRL. Written in C++ it uses multiple threads
and cores. It is capable of Chess960 and has experimental support for polyglot
opening books.
Original-Maintainer: Milan Zamazal <pdm@debian.org>
welp Magnus is so cooked
прикол
Toscani, thanks, all I had to do is enable the test repo, and I now have 17-0.1.
Thanks for getting me to check.
@Toscani said in #31:
> github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/releases/tag/sf_17.1
> github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/releases?q=prerelease%3Atrue
> @entropyfoe
> Package: stockfish
> Version: 17-0.1~mx23+1
> Architecture: amd64
> Maintainer: Steven Pusser <stevep@mxlinux.org>
+20 Elo, WOW now it will take me 10 more moves to beat Stockfish. If Stockfish get just a litte stronger now it won't require my help anymore to analyze it's games.
it is a good update
why the survey?
vxh2
@StockfishNews The last question ("Generally would you prefer Stockfish to distribute resources equally between the lines, or would you prefer that worse lines had fewer resources assigned to them?") can easily be misunderstood the way it is formulated, because a lot of people that don't know much about engines could think you mean all existing lines, not the number of lines you've selected. You could have wrote "these lines" instead of "the lines" for example, to make that clear. When drawing conclusions based on this survey, keep in mind the answers on this one might not represent what you actually want to know.
I'd rather want an engine_wrapper.py to see the z-scoring confidence values of the top moves.