So you are saying you have bound each hlds process to its own cpu to verify that 0c vs 1d is better? Or you just let the processes run and see what cpu they are using overall?
I will do a test tonight. Currently the settings are this. Dual p3 1ghz, 1 gig ram using taskset to bind one hlds to each cpu. Each server running awp_map at 14 players. Identical configs..etc. Both are using 3.1.1.1d. With spikes up to 85% cpu. Average is around 65%. 5741 cstrike 25 0 145m 131m 8860 R 67.1 17.3 5097:57 hlds_i686 21975 cstrike 25 0 127m 112m 8860 R 67.1 14.9 3338:41 hlds_i686 I will switch first just one to 3.1.1.0c. And compare usage. Then I will switch both to 0c to compare overall average usage and spikes. I will post the result tomorrow in a reply. I won't bother testing on the xeon boxes yet. dan ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 11:25 AM Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > Well you must carry the magic stick because you are the ONLY one. I have a > brand new Dual MP 2400 w/ FreeBSD sitting here running only 2 CS server. > Exact same specs, both running 24/7 dust with 20 max player. No mods what so > ever. Just a straight stripped down CS server. And when they are both maxed > out the x.0c averages 20% usage of one cpu while the x.1d averages 33%. > There is Nothing else and I really mean nothing running on this box other > then these CS server and these numbers are very steady. Now at 12 players > each the performance is a whole lot closer like off by a few % but not at 20 > players. > > Jeremy > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of tim cox > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 3:05 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: [hlds_linux] Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > not wanting to get flamed for wheat i am about to say, i just had to let you > know that > i am happy with the 3.1.1.1d performance. i run a standard half-life > deathmatch on a dual > P3 700MHz server with 1 gig of ram, and performance after the upgrade has > got slightly better. > i love valve. > :-) > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 01 August 2003 17:13 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: hlds_linux digest, Vol 1 #2544 - 12 msgs > > > Send hlds_linux mailing list submissions to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of hlds_linux digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: GOING BACK TO BETA1 (Daniel Stroven) > 2. Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... (Erik van den Berg) > 3. Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... (Jason Arden) > 4. Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... (Steven Hartland) > 5. RE: Starting hlds_run? (Simon) > 6. Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... (Erik van den Berg) > 7. Re: 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... (Steven Hartland) > 8. hlds 3.1.1.0 fix for buffer-overrun exploit [was "_working_ workaround > for hlds exploit on linux"] (Virtual Master) > 9. AW: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d??? ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > 10. AW: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d??? ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > 11. Re: GOING BACK TO BETA1 (Douglas R Taber) > > --__--__-- > > Message: 1 > From: "Daniel Stroven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] GOING BACK TO BETA1 > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 09:49:25 -0400 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > put the crack pipe down and don't go near any sharp objects. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 2:11 PM > Subject: [hlds_linux] GOING BACK TO BETA1 > > > > > > i say valve goes back to 3110c and recodes all the new shit. loads a > server > > with players and compares. still f****in' 30-60% more cpu?? > > > > well back to 3110c and start coding again. from scratch. > > again. > > again. > > again. > > > > until you do that goddamn thing right! i mean it's still CS15 > > heeeloooooo!!! i'm still running the same game, same f***ing feeling. > > > > all q3 servers, all times are rock solid comparing to hlds!!! and loads? > > well.. u'll be amazed! crashing? not 1 in 5months. > > > > if someone will give me a q3ded server and a cs15 mod and it will have > the > > same feeling ill put it up instanly. fuck hlds! > > > > hlds is poorly writen that's the bottom line. its the same fuckin cs > we're > > playing for how long??? remember cs1.3?? besides the death-cam and no > > bunny-hopping what was so much changed?? what's so remarcable improved?? > > > > NOTHING. > > > > this is not about hlds it's about you. ITS ABOUT CONTROL. ITS ABOUT THE > > TIME YOU HAVE TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT with NO1 FPS. > > > > you're on the top now, but it won't be for long. the time will come > > and players will play something else. > > > > THEN YOU'LL GET REALLY BAD BURNED AND NO ONE WILL STAY AFTER YOU TO WRITE > > GOOD GAME SERVERS. go to id and take some fuckin lessons. > > > > and stop the $%#^&## super fuckin features!!!!!!! gimme a fuckin server > we > > can play on!!! > > > > it's fuckin DICTATORSHIP that's what it is! you don't care about the > community! and > > hire some 10 guys to answer prompt on the list! > > > > go back to 3110c and start coding again. from scratch. > > again. > > and again. > > and again. > > > > if hl2ds will work on opterons only i'll tactically nuke the valve > center. > > and snipe everyone who'll live that. :)) > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 2 > From: "Erik van den Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:56:24 +0200 > Organization: XL-Hosting > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > its running 2.4.21 as kernel, very stripped. I dont use the pingboost > options and i have tried with hyperthreading on and off, this load varies, > its not all the time like this but just every few seconds its up like that > and drops to reasonable levels again > > -- > - > > Met vriendelijke groet, > Erik van den Berg > > Server Administrator/Unix Security Consultant > Technische Dienst XL-Hosting > > http://www.xl-hosting.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 3:49 PM > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > > Although we are seeing high CPU loads on most CS maps ~50% of a 2.4Ghz > > Xeon with 16 players, when the servers are empty the load is only a few % > 5 at > > the most. Could be an issue with your kernel there? Also you are aware > that > > -pingboost options in 3.1.1.1 do not mirror that of 3.1.1.0? > > > > On a side note, dont forget that hyperthreading can degrade performance > > instead of increase it. > > > > Steve / K > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Erik van den Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: 01 August 2003 14:42 > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > > > > > Thanks valve... > > > > > > PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME CPU > COMMAND > > > 1279 itchie 14 0 54072 52M 4048 S 36.9 5.2 0:37 1 > hlds_i686 > > > 1166 itchie 13 0 57632 56M 4916 S 33.7 5.5 2:15 0 > hlds_i686 > > > 1317 itchie 11 0 55308 53M 4404 S 12.1 5.3 1:13 1 > hlds_i686 > > > 1203 itchie 10 0 55540 54M 2360 S 7.9 5.3 6:58 1 > > > wolfded.x86 > > > 1242 itchie 9 0 55560 54M 4456 S 0.1 5.3 1:12 1 > hlds_i686 > > > 1450 itchie 9 0 1696 1696 1572 S 0.1 0.1 0:00 1 sshd > > > > > > on the first server there are 4 people online, the rest is empty. The > server > > > is a 2.4 pentium 4 (hyperthreaded) > > > All running 3.1.1.1d > > > > > > > These insane cpu usages were not on 3.1.1.0c > > > For a change i would actually like to hear something from valve > concerning > > > this issue instead of the utter silence. They should start acting like a > > > company instead of childishly not answering emails about valid complains > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 08:59:11 -0500 > From: Jason Arden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > What does pingboost have to do with high cpu util? All my readings > explained that the pingboost 3 uses EXTRA cpu. > > Please explain. > > -PM > > Erik van den Berg wrote: > > >its running 2.4.21 as kernel, very stripped. I dont use the pingboost > >options and i have tried with hyperthreading on and off, this load varies, > >its not all the time like this but just every few seconds its up like that > >and drops to reasonable levels again > > > >-- > >- > > > >Met vriendelijke groet, > >Erik van den Berg > > > >Server Administrator/Unix Security Consultant > >Technische Dienst XL-Hosting > > > >http://www.xl-hosting.com > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 3:49 PM > >Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > > > > > > > >>Although we are seeing high CPU loads on most CS maps ~50% of a 2.4Ghz > >>Xeon with 16 players, when the servers are empty the load is only a few % > >> > >> > >5 at > > > > > >>the most. Could be an issue with your kernel there? Also you are aware > >> > >> > >that > > > > > >>-pingboost options in 3.1.1.1 do not mirror that of 3.1.1.0? > >> > >>On a side note, dont forget that hyperthreading can degrade performance > >>instead of increase it. > >> > >> Steve / K > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: "Erik van den Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Sent: 01 August 2003 14:42 > >>Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>Thanks valve... > >>> > >>> PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME CPU > >>> > >>> > >COMMAND > > > > > >>> 1279 itchie 14 0 54072 52M 4048 S 36.9 5.2 0:37 1 > >>> > >>> > >hlds_i686 > > > > > >>> 1166 itchie 13 0 57632 56M 4916 S 33.7 5.5 2:15 0 > >>> > >>> > >hlds_i686 > > > > > >>> 1317 itchie 11 0 55308 53M 4404 S 12.1 5.3 1:13 1 > >>> > >>> > >hlds_i686 > > > > > >>> 1203 itchie 10 0 55540 54M 2360 S 7.9 5.3 6:58 1 > >>>wolfded.x86 > >>> 1242 itchie 9 0 55560 54M 4456 S 0.1 5.3 1:12 1 > >>> > >>> > >hlds_i686 > > > > > >>> 1450 itchie 9 0 1696 1696 1572 S 0.1 0.1 0:00 1 sshd > >>> > >>>on the first server there are 4 people online, the rest is empty. The > >>> > >>> > >server > > > > > >>>is a 2.4 pentium 4 (hyperthreaded) > >>>All running 3.1.1.1d > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > > >>>These insane cpu usages were not on 3.1.1.0c > >>>For a change i would actually like to hear something from valve > >>> > >>> > >concerning > > > > > >>>this issue instead of the utter silence. They should start acting like a > >>>company instead of childishly not answering emails about valid complains > >>> > >>> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > >> > >> > >please visit: > > > > > >>http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > >http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 4 > From: "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:11:46 +0100 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I've heard that some of the 2.4 kernels do behave strangely and do spike > hlds for some unknown reason. When you said disabled hyperthreading > did you also run a NONE SMP kernel or just turn it off in the bios? I'm > pretty > sure I've seen SMP and APM both attributed to this behaviour. Alternatively > you may want to try FreeBSD which never seems to have this spiky > behaviour. > > Steve / K > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Erik van den Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: 01 August 2003 14:56 > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > > its running 2.4.21 as kernel, very stripped. I dont use the pingboost > > options and i have tried with hyperthreading on and off, this load varies, > > its not all the time like this but just every few seconds its up like that > > and drops to reasonable levels again > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 5 > From: "Simon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Starting hlds_run? > Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 15:11:01 +0100 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hi > > Thanks Harouff > > That got it working . Problem was I did as you said but then I also > had map > dod_anzio in my server.cfg. You don't need both! > Do you recommend a server admin tool for Linux? Something that will make > running a server easier not harder :-) > I currently have a dod server running on 81.86.118.184:27015 with hlds_id. > What is the trick to getting my server to show up in gamespy? > > Thanks > Kitch > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Damian > Harouff > Sent: 27 July 2003 19:40 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Starting hlds_run? > > > You didn't specify a starting map. > > ./hlds_run -game dmc +map "mapname" +maxplayers "players" > > Putting it in server.cfg won't work, as that's executed after the map > has been loaded. > > On 27 Jul 2003 19:16:14 +0100, you wrote: > > >Hi > > > >I'm having a problem with hlds not dropping back to the command prompt. > >I'm running red hat 9. Loading hlds from a terminal window with ./hlds > >-game dmc +exec server.cfg > >This is a copy of the output.Cursor just flashes. No input possible? > >If I run just ./hlds I get prompt, but when I type status it says not > >connected. Any ideas? > > > >Console initialized. > >Protocol version 46 > >Exe version 3.1.1.1 > >Exe build: 22:35:19 Apr 29 2003 (2378) > >WON Auth Server > >Server IP address 192.168.7.3:27015 > >Adding master server 65.73.232.251:27010 > >Adding master server 65.73.232.253:27010 > >Adding master server 65.73.232.252:27010 > > > >_______________________________________________ > >To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > >http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/2003 > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/2003 > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 6 > From: "Erik van den Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 16:21:59 +0200 > Organization: XL-Hosting > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > No the kernel was still SMP compiled then, APM is off in the kernel, and > well 3.1.1.0 was not causing this behaviour. > Ah and freebsd, well i dont really have the chance to test that out in > combination with hlds. I'll see how it goes and if necassery i will switch > back to 3.1.1.0 again. Although i wish valve would maintain a 3.1.1.0 'tree' > too (hell even 2.2 kernels are still maintained). > > I think it would please alot of admins if they did that ... > > -- > - > > Met vriendelijke groet, > Erik van den Berg > > Server Administrator/Unix Security Consultant > Technische Dienst XL-Hosting > > http://www.xl-hosting.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 4:11 PM > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > > I've heard that some of the 2.4 kernels do behave strangely and do spike > > hlds for some unknown reason. When you said disabled hyperthreading > > did you also run a NONE SMP kernel or just turn it off in the bios? I'm > pretty > > sure I've seen SMP and APM both attributed to this behaviour. > Alternatively > > you may want to try FreeBSD which never seems to have this spiky > > behaviour. > > > > Steve / K > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Erik van den Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: 01 August 2003 14:56 > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > > > > > its running 2.4.21 as kernel, very stripped. I dont use the pingboost > > > options and i have tried with hyperthreading on and off, this load > varies, > > > its not all the time like this but just every few seconds its up like > that > > > and drops to reasonable levels again > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 7 > From: "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:34:04 +0100 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > In software development is not usually feasible to maintain a large amount > of development streams. I agree that it would be nice if we could have > 3.1.1.0 > performance back but I understand the reasoning behind not supporting it > now. > Things move on and you just need to move with it. If in time they can bring > performance of the newer streams back then all well and good. But you cant > expect them to support old dev streams its just too much work. > > Steve / K > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Erik van den Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: 01 August 2003 15:21 > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance... > > > > No the kernel was still SMP compiled then, APM is off in the kernel, and > > well 3.1.1.0 was not causing this behaviour. > > Ah and freebsd, well i dont really have the chance to test that out in > > combination with hlds. I'll see how it goes and if necassery i will switch > > back to 3.1.1.0 again. Although i wish valve would maintain a 3.1.1.0 > 'tree' > > too (hell even 2.2 kernels are still maintained). > > > > I think it would please alot of admins if they did that ... > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 8 > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 16:55:52 +0200 (CEST) > From: Virtual Master <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [hlds_linux] hlds 3.1.1.0 fix for buffer-overrun exploit [was > "_working_ workaround > for hlds exploit on linux"] > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hello everyone, > > After reading the messages on this list for two days, I believe there's > quite a lot server admins that don't want to run 3.1.1.1 beta servers > for whatever reason. With valve releasing their security fix only as an > upgrade to version 3.1.1.1d these people have no other choice than > upgrading, even if there are strong arguments against the 3.1.1.1x > versions. > > I decided to clean-up the fix I released on wednesday and present it as an > alternative for those who don't want to run the new betas. > The new version doesn't retrieve the original functions address with every > call, but only once, so there is no chance of wasting performance. It's > also commented so people understand what it does, and it tells the user > about it being successfully loaded by printing a line right at the server > startup "boffix_i386.so - fix for buffer overflow vulnerability in hlds > 3.1.1.0". > > Either compile the source using the following gcc statement: > "gcc -Wall -fpic boffix.c -shared -Wl,-soname,boffix.so -lc -o > boffix_i386.so" (all in one line) or use the binary I compiled. > FreeBSD users have to use linux-compiled binaries, too, as the hlds is > linux, and the linked dynamic objects also need to be linux. > > Install the fix by copying the boffix_i386.so to your hlds_l directory, > and modifying your hlds_run script to contain the line > "export LD_PRELOAD=./boffix_i386.so". This can be right before or after > the LD_LIBRARY_PATH export on linux machines, but needs to be right before > the two lines containing "$HL $*" for FreeBSD systems. > > Thanks a lot to Miklos of clanhost.dk for hosting the patch and the > source: http://miklos.clanhost.dk/ > > Remember, that fix is only meant for those who want to keep running > version 3.1.1.0, if you're already using a 3.1.1.1 version use the new > version valve provides. > > Best regards, > > Dominic (Virtual Master) > > -------------------------- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > irc.quakenet.org #nocheat, #cheaterlog > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 9 > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: AW: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d??? > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 17:43:57 +0200 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > www.d-g-c.de/files/cstrike/hlsw_1_0_0_6-beta.exe > > hmm don't know why they removed the link to taht developer release... > > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Eric > (Deacon) > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 31. Juli 2003 20:48 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Re: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d??? > > > Frank Stollar wrote: > >> Dowload lastest HLSW (v1.0.0-beta 3). > > > > Latest beta is v1.0.0-beta6 and I recommend to use it, as beta3 has > > many bugs already fixed in beta6. > > http://www.hlsw.org/index.php?url=3Dhlsw_download&move=3Dshowmirrors&id=3D8 > > That's the only download link I can find, and it points to 1.0.0.3. Any > suggestions? > > -- > Eric (the Deacon remix) > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 10 > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: AW: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d??? > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 17:45:14 +0200 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > your right... > > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Eric > (Deacon) > Gesendet: Freitag, 1. August 2003 00:34 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Re: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d??? > > > Frank Stollar wrote: > > Funny, the internation side seems to be not up-to-date. As the > > developer is german, here the link from the german page (www.hlsw.de): > > > > ftp://ftp.hlsw.org/downloads/beta/hlsw_1_0_0_6-beta.exe > > Hmmm...so that's just the program executable, NOT an updated installer? > > -- > Eric (the Deacon remix) > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 11 > From: "Douglas R Taber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] GOING BACK TO BETA1 > Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 09:58:50 -0700 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > First take your medication, then sit down and realize that not every > release of the dedicated server has ANYTHING to do with Counter-strike. > The last release had NOTHING to do with it, all changes were done for > the release of Day of Defeat. Its no secret that valve is supporting > multiple modifications with the same engine(halflife), and occasionally > some mods or going to need patches while others do not, but for > consistancies sake, they all should be the same version. > > > > > i say valve goes back to 3110c and recodes all the new shit. loads a > server > > with players and compares. still f****in' 30-60% more cpu?? > > > > well back to 3110c and start coding again. from scratch. > > again. > > again. > > again. > > > > until you do that goddamn thing right! i mean it's still CS15 > > heeeloooooo!!! i'm still running the same game, same f***ing feeling. > > > > all q3 servers, all times are rock solid comparing to hlds!!! and > loads? > > well.. u'll be amazed! crashing? not 1 in 5months. > > > > if someone will give me a q3ded server and a cs15 mod and it will > have the > > same feeling ill put it up instanly. fuck hlds! > > > > hlds is poorly writen that's the bottom line. its the same fuckin cs > we're > > playing for how long??? remember cs1.3?? besides the death-cam and no > > bunny-hopping what was so much changed?? what's so remarcable > improved?? > > > > NOTHING. > > > > this is not about hlds it's about you. ITS ABOUT CONTROL. ITS ABOUT > THE > > TIME YOU HAVE TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT with NO1 FPS. > > > > you're on the top now, but it won't be for long. the time will come > > and players will play something else. > > > > THEN YOU'LL GET REALLY BAD BURNED AND NO ONE WILL STAY AFTER YOU TO > WRITE > > GOOD GAME SERVERS. go to id and take some fuckin lessons. > > > > and stop the $%#^&## super fuckin features!!!!!!! gimme a fuckin > server we > > can play on!!! > > > > it's fuckin DICTATORSHIP that's what it is! you don't care about the > community! and > > hire some 10 guys to answer prompt on the list! > > > > go back to 3110c and start coding again. from scratch. > > again. > > and again. > > and again. > > > > if hl2ds will work on opterons only i'll tactically nuke the valve > center. > > and snipe everyone who'll live that. :)) > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > archives, please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > -- > > > > --__--__-- > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > End of hlds_linux Digest > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
