[ut3] hey

Slavik Goltser slavikg at gmail.com
Sun Sep 5 21:41:40 EDT 2010


The end result is the same ...

middleware could mean a lot of things (as far as others' code they used).
saying it was gamespy's fault is as good as saying the martians don't like
linux.

On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 5:49 PM, oldkawman <oldkawman at netscape.net> wrote:

>  It may fit the situation and was based on some beyond unreal forum
> discussions. We are not experts. It was just thrown out there and kinda
> stuck. You can see all in that thread.
>
> http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=181800
>
> >From my memory, it could be any of the middle wear used that is the
> culprit. All I remember, in the absence of the original source, was Ryan
> said it was that certain middle wear vendor's policy to do nothing linux.
> So, that was what needed a work around. He also said it was easy in the
> server, but likely problematic for the client. I know what problematic means
> when I use that word. If it means the same to him, then, there will not be a
> client.
>
> Does anyone still have that source? It's back between Oct 2007 and Jan '08.
> I thought I saw that in the epic forums, but cannot find it anymore. I am
> sure it's somewhere out there. It's harder to remove once it's been out.
>
> So, he found a work around, but that will not fly as well for some reason.
> That's sounds like what I usually mean by problematic.
>
> Daniel Eckl wrote:
>
> I'm still puzzled about why somebody would think .NET could be
> involved. If you want to run .NET code on Linux, you have to go for
> mono anyway. Well of course, one might think that Microsoft then could
> argue that mono is infringing some of their patents, and that's why
> the port is not possible, but that's rather doubtable, because in this
> case MS could have killed mono for good long time ago. Okay, dunno
> what deals Miguel de Icaza or Novell might have with Microsoft, but I
> can't imagine that there are hidden unbelievable secrets.
>
> Patents more often are in techniques like physics engine (havok,
> physix, etc) or voice middleware (vivox, voiceage) or such. If the
> patent owner refuses to do the port and refuses to give
> permission/docs to you to port it yourself, then you're busted, no
> matter how good you can develop.
>
> 2010/9/4 Валерий <jazzvoid at gmail.com> <jazzvoid at gmail.com>:
>
>
>  I don't really understand what features of .NET could be removed from server
> and hardcoded in client.
>
> 2010/9/4 oldkawman <oldkawman at netscape.net> <oldkawman at netscape.net>
>
>  And that was the last thing I heard as well. Epic muzzled him after that.
>
> I am guessing it's the microsoft .NET framework for which there is no
> reasonable work around that is the offending code..
>
> Daniel Eckl wrote:
>
> 2010/9/1 Reto Schneider <mailinglisten at reto-schneider.ch> <mailinglisten at reto-schneider.ch>:
>
>
> Citation?
>
> http://forumplanet.gamespy.com/in_the_news/b50284/19563025/p1
>
> Guess that's all that's available officially.
>
> --
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> ut3 mailing listut3 at icculus.orghttp://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/ut3
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ut3 mailing listut3 at icculus.orghttp://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/ut3
>
>        --
> Valeriy
>
> _______________________________________________
> ut3 mailing listut3 at icculus.orghttp://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/ut3
>
>
>      _______________________________________________
> ut3 mailing listut3 at icculus.orghttp://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/ut3
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ut3 mailing list
> ut3 at icculus.org
> http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/ut3
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://icculus.org/pipermail/ut3/attachments/20100905/629e55f0/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the ut3 mailing list