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

[ScratchMonkey]

--On Monday, March 31, 2003 12:24 PM -0600 "Stewart, John" 
<johns at artesyncp.com> wrote:

> 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?

While a static version will serve the greater number of admins, a dynamic 
version has the advantage of a lower in-memory footprint. The memory for 
the library code is shared across all applications. This also improves 
cache performance.

I would argue for a static version until the server gets much more stable, 
and then consider releasing a dynamic version.