FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Darwin... and I don't speak of the historical
BSDs.
Sure, no more worries. :-P
I do agree that it sucks to support hundreds of systems with different
versions of all sorts of libraries, but I bet there are people in the
BSD camps who are up for more bleeding edge stuff, while others rather
stay conservative with yesterday's C library. What does this give you?
Absolutely the same situation as the bulk of Linux distributions:
different versions of everything.
With Linux, at least the kernel is more or less the same.
~~ Ondra
P.S. I doubt BSD binaries are worth it until Linux support is
more-than-decent, as Linux has a /slightly/ larger userbase. Fixing
Linux should therefore be a higher priority than getting out
one-quarter-broken binaries for yet another platform.
On 01.08.07 16:34 Uhr, kama wrote:
Wouldnt that be sweet? No more worries about different distributions... ;p
/Bjorn
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, M. Kraaij wrote:
Are BSD binaries an option, Alfred?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alfred Reynolds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 6:15 PM
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Alfred We Need Your Help
Our linux platforms are aimed at being stable development platforms, NOT
at being production servers. You would be much better served by having
the guys on this list that run server farm chip in.
We run Slackware 9.0 with a 2.6.21.5 kernel for the dev platform and we
have Debian etch on a test machine. Both machines are SMP.
- Alfred
tsuehpsyde wrote:
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Alfred,
I don't mean to direct this straight to you, but you're the only real
contact within VALVe we have that actually gives us information or
takes our advice/suggestions on this mailing list. With that said,
can we get some
sort of straight forward answer as to the recommended platform or
configuration for SourceDS for Linux? I realize that Linux does take
a back
seat to Windows as far as SourceDS goes (look at the incident a year
or so
ago when VALVe released a linux update that would not even start in a
vanilla state), but some sort of input would at least help us get on
the
right track.
These are the three core questions I would like to see answered by
Alfred or someone else directly from VALVe and not a third party:
1. What distribution of Linux does VALVe use for testing and
deployment?
2. What kernel version (and also patches if applicable) are used in
this
platform? Also, can we get the kernel configuration, or even the
kernel's .config file?
3. What other system packages and versions core to the OS (glibc,
etc.) are
used?
Those three questions, I don't think, are asking a lot from VALVe,
considering the amount of time and money we put into hosting the
game. I
don't like the idea, but I'd down-grade packages as needed on my
servers to
keep things running smoothly. Also, I'm not sure *what* you guys are
doing,
but it seems that the updates are a back and forth game with my
ability to
renice my game server processes to -20 (if set, both game servers
spike to 99% CPU used). This is a core functionality to my servers,
and I (as well as
other Source administrators) would really appreciate having it fixed.
It
appears on my servers when two game server processes are set as -20.
However, with one set to -20 and the other left at 0, it's fine.
Again, this fixes/breaks with updates on and off and is sort of
frustrating since
setting the process priority is written into my scripts, and I have to
remove it every time it breaks (and game server performance suffers
from
it).
Thanks for your time,
-tsuehpsyde
SourceKills.com
--
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
