[bf1942] Linux server status report: 2003-03-31

[Andrew Chen]

At 10:24 AM 3/31/2003, you wrote:

> > How about a static version and a dynamic version?  That way
> > we can choose
> > which one we want to run.  The solution should NOT be
> > maintaining both a
> > gcc2 and gcc3 build, though.
>
>What is your objection to a static version? Binary size? If you've got 
>enough bandwidth to run a bf1942 server, surely you have enough bandwidth 
>to download a few hundered megs, right?
>
>johnS

Memory.  Memory is cheap, but not THAT cheap :p  I suspect a statically 
compiled BF binary might run close to 100MB without trying too hard.