[bf1942] Vietnam dedicated server?

[Kingsley Foreman]

RE: [bf1942] Vietnam dedicated server?welcome newbie :)


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Peter Chang 
  To: 'bf1942 at icculus.org' 
  Cc: 'weasel at cs.stanford.edu' 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 11:20 PM
  Subject: RE: [bf1942] Vietnam dedicated server?


  [ meta : i only joined last night so hopefully i'm not breaking some ettiquette here by not catching up w/ all 10,000 messages and only searching for the message andreas forwarded me ]

  From: Andreas Fredriksson 
  Subject: RE: [bf1942] Vietnam dedicated server? 

  > To be honest I wouldn't know. What I do know is that there's a very talented 
  > gentleman helping the DICE Canada team with the Linux server so it's up to 
  > that office to make arrangements for releases. 

  still not an 'official' notice, but i wanted send an update 

  first, i am a contractor, not a dice employee, and as such no arrangments have been made for me staying past the initial delivery date. any bugs are all my fault :-) (we'll get to the shortcomings that i know about in a third or fourth).

  second, i can confirm that andy berdan (andy.berdan at dicecanada.com) is the owner of the bfv dedicated servers (win32 and linux) after yesterday's brain dump.

  third, ea wasn't keen (see point one on why i don't know the actual wording used) on early releasing linux servers. their own testing  of the linux stuff has been zero.

  fourth, would it be possible for the person (or company) hosting the bf1942 stuff to host the bfv files? either way could they send me (probably best not to spam the entire list) mail at either the dice or cs address so that i (andy's on vacation now and will likely be so until after the ok) can arrange something.

  fifth, i tried to make the bfv server experience live up to what you've come to expect having andreas and joakim's 1.6, but there are some differences that come to mind. the two biggies are packaging and remote admin.

  packaging - 

  i followed the 1.6 strategy of shipping both dynamic and static binaries w/ one difference. the bfv1942 .static is completely static. ld complained that some symbol (i can't find it in my notes right now) wasn't available in the libc.a version. my understanding of the issue is that some systems either don't have dynamic versions or have differnet versions of libstdc++. i play some linker games and get the following from ldd. is this ok?

          libncurses.so.5 => /lib/libncurses.so.5 (0x40020000) 
          libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x4005f000) 
          libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x400b1000) 
          libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x400b4000) 
          libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x401e6000) 
          /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000) 

  additionally, i only really tested this on my systems here: debian 2.2.x on a 1.7 p4 and mandrake 2.4.x on virtual pc on mac os x :-) like bf1942 it doesn't do anything really whacky (systemwise :-), but it would be good to get a sanity check from the viewing public.

  remote admin - 

  andreas mentioned the remote console to me before leaving, but not knowing how to test it i just asked around here. no one around here really knew either so all did was connect, run a few commands, and quit. needless to say this was not sufficient. i've moslty locally merged all of the remote console fixes, but this will probably not be in the 1.0 release (win32 or linux).

  questions/comments/ideas/flames? 

  \p 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://icculus.org/pipermail/bf1942/attachments/20040310/80c3b05c/attachment.htm>