[bf1942] Vietnam dedicated server?

Neal Clayton xayd at vae-victus.org
Wed Mar 10 09:36:58 EST 2004

Did the original BF server work with 2.2 kernels?  I never tried it, but 
the consensus on the forum was that 2.4.18 was the "suggested" minimum 
kernel version to get everything running under with no issues.  If 2.2 
works that's great I guess, but I don't think 2.2 compatibility is 
absolutely necessary if it's something that will slow you guys down if 
the original BF server didn't work with it, but someone correct me if 
I'm wrong and it did work with 2.2 kernels.  I'm running Debian with 
2.4.18 on on the 1.6 BF server with no issues at all.

I'm no programmer, so won't comment on the static links ;).

On the remote admin situation...

We've already had that argument on this list, and it's pretty obvious 
that we're not gonna see any type of third party program with the 1.0 
release nor are we gonna see anything other than the remote console that 
ships with the game, but all flames about that aside, what we *need* if 
the remote console is all we're getting is...

1) COMPLETE documentation about all the commands and what they do.
2) a COMPLETE list of what settings will "default" to something if 
unspecified when the server is started
3) a COMPLETE list of what settings will be "off" if unspecified when 
the server is started

I think a good start would be having the server print its current 
settings to the console as output when it starts.  I don't mind having 
to do things to the server via command line, and players who have 
permission to change things on my server will learn the commands if they 
must, but there's still not much documentation about the commands even 
with the BF server especially as they relate to #2.  Those of us who 
play this game competitively have a specific set of settings that must 
be enabled/disabled for matches, and a huge problem imo is having 
players copy and paste a list of settings given to them by whatever 
league or tournanment, then finding out when they get in the game that 
they didn't specify something and it's defaulted to a setting that they 
must change, and they have to go searching for what it is to change it.  
This is an issue as an example with BF1942 and the camera and TK punish 

Either the server has to print its settings to the console when started, 
or there should be a command to manually print the settings to the 
console to give people an idea of what they're dealing with and how the 
server works, with BF1942 it was trial and error to find out what your 
own server was doing.

If you really wanna do us a huge favor just cause you're in a giving 
mood, a graphical app that interfaces with the server console such as 
the app that Kevin with blackbagops.com wrote for originally for BF or 
wrapper to a web script that interfaces with the server console would of 
course be fantastic ;).  Since EA provides this to people who rent 
servers from them, I don't see why it's too much to ask for them to give 
that to us, after all we paid for the game too.

Peter Chang wrote:

> [ 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/20040310/85d3b19e/attachment.htm>

More information about the Bf1942 mailing list