Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance...

[lists]

> You cant get any smoother and better gameplay than pb3 on .0c. As many
> have stated: clans will not play on servers that have .1x on the server.

It's very true. Many people will not play on 3.1.1.1 servers because of
the hitbox issues. One community that rents a server from me was losing
all of it's players because of the upgrade, so they had me put 3.1.1.0
back on there.

I put all of my other clients at risk when I let a client run 3.1.1.0, due
to the recent buffer overflow exploit. As server admins we need a secure,
stable, and high-performance application. As performance continues to
degrade, it's becoming unaffordable to host servers anymore.
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

[hlds_linux] logsdir

[Casey Zacek]

Am I just being dumb?  It's very possible..

(broken down to as simple a form as I can get..):

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/bfb-hl/hlds_l% LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ./hlds_amd -game cstrike -port 
27017 +logsdir logz
[...]
Server logging data to file logs/L0731006.log

+logsdir logz, yet server still logs to "logs".  I don't get it.

--
-- Casey Zacek (Zippo)  Beer for Breakfast servers
   66.111.111.66:27015 (CS multi-map) 
   66.111.111.66:27016 (CS inferno/dust2/aztec/militia) Dallas, TX
   66.111.111.66:14567 (BF1942)
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: Re[2]: [hlds_linux] liblist.gam, gamedll bug

[Simon Garner]

On Friday, August 01, 2003 1:31 PM [GMT+1200=NZT],
Dariusz 'Officerrr' Kolasinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> I know, but i like to have versions in *.so module names, and i think
> it is a bug.
>

Do what I do - rename the module so it has a version number, then create
a symlink with the correct name. Then you don't need to change any
config files either.

-Simon

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

[hlds_linux] hz=1000 - how to?

[admin]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
BlankOk im running linux and im wondering where is the file to set this
option at?  /usr/src/linux-2.4.21/ ?

also whats with the ac patches and other patches i hear about?


--
[ Blank Bkgrd.gif of type image/gif deleted ]
--

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance...

[James Sykes]

>And last of all I want to quote on thing that nailed it from Michael
>Ressens post:
>  "Anything that can be done to aid in the load issue we're
>   facing is going to be the most welcome relief to us."
Yes PLEASE!

Problem is - people want valve to fix cheating - but they also want them to
fix performance. IMO anti-cheat have caused the biggest CPU increases. Ever
since VAC was released and more and more levels of anti-wallhack were
introduced - the CPU has shotup HUGELY.
(Essentially i think the server calculates what the client should see -
which must be causing alot of cpu - correct me if im wrong.)

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

[hlds_linux] 3.1.1.0c - 3.1.1.1d Performance...

[kama]

After reading over 2000 mails in this list today this is what I have to
say about this issue...

CPU usage is the really big reason. At the very least the CPU usage should
be as .0c, preferable lower than that.

Michael Ressen has a good point when he declare that we as admins can not
afford to upgrade the servers hardware all the time. So CPU usage is a
great deal for us admins.

Ive been running a csserver from aprox when cs turned 1.1.. Back then I
could run 4 servers on my dual p3 550. 2 public and 2 match servers. After
each of your release there have been a big jump in cpu usage. Things where
added that did not need to be added. like the voicecom. Several others
where on the market allready when you added that feature.. We all remember
roger wilco and teamspeak, which still some use... that jump made me
go to 1 pub and 1 match.

The thing is... You have the world leading game on your hands.. The CS mod
have more online players than any other game or hlmod COMBINED! (according
to gamespys stats).. The player likes how the game are... the game dont
need any new features, we like it just the way it is... We could care less
for some fancy riotshield or changing sounds...

Why spend resources on adding more features to the game, when the real
effort should be directed towards fixing bugs, security issues, optimizing
and supporting the community...

We as admins ARE half-life / counter strike. Without us you will not have
the amount of players that you currently have...

CPU usage is not the only problem though.. One other thing that are really
a big issue is the latency. The players wants and loves the low latency.
Latency you could only get when using pingbooster 3 on .0c. I could not
get the same low latency on .1x as on .0c. nomatter what pingbooster
option I choosed to use. I tried all the different suggestions that where
posted on this list with no help...

I for one can not figure out how you can replace an option with something
else. its like replacing the f flag on tar with z. since the new pb3
option is different than the old you should have called it pb4. I would
love to see the old pb3 option back. If you dont want it in the system you
should have made pb3 obsolete and left todo nothing.

You cant get any smoother and better gameplay than pb3 on .0c. As many
have stated: clans will not play on servers that have .1x on the server.

The bottom line is that you really need to learn how to listen to your
users.. You should be able to get a lot of responces and feedback with
that huge amount of users you have in your posession... with users I
really mean admins...  Since admins are more reliable as source than your
average player Joe.

So here is something for you to listen to:
  Please fix so the latency are lower without the cost of high CPU
  usage... The latency should not be much higher than the actual icmp
  ping..

And last of all I want to quote on thing that nailed it from Michael
Ressens post:
  "Anything that can be done to aid in the load issue we're
   facing is going to be the most welcome relief to us."

Regards,
Bjorn

--
You never get a second chance to make a bad first impression.

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: Re[2]: [hlds_linux] liblist.gam, gamedll bug

[Scott Pettit]

What I think you're likely to find is that the dll itself is referencing
to a specific filename. Of course I may be totally wrong but do keep it
in mind. The other idea is to get the source and check any references
then edit accordingly.


Cheers,

Scott Pettit
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dariusz
'Officerrr' Kolasinski
Sent: Friday, 1 August 2003 1:31 p.m.
To: HLDS_L
Subject: Re[2]: [hlds_linux] liblist.gam, gamedll bug

Witam,

Friday, August 1, 2003, 3:21:03 AM, you wrote:

SP> Just rename the dll and point liblist.gam to that instead...

I know, but i like to have versions in *.so module names, and i think it
is
a bug.

--
Pozdrawiam,
Dariusz 'Officerrr' Kolasinski
[Linux Administrator] [gg: 516354] [uin: 8304172]
"Silent my voice, I've got no choice..."

___
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

Re[2]: [hlds_linux] liblist.gam, gamedll bug

[Dariusz 'Officerrr' Kolasinski]

Witam,

Friday, August 1, 2003, 3:21:03 AM, you wrote:

SP> Just rename the dll and point liblist.gam to that instead...

I know, but i like to have versions in *.so module names, and i think it is
a bug.

--
Pozdrawiam,
Dariusz 'Officerrr' Kolasinski
[Linux Administrator] [gg: 516354] [uin: 8304172]
"Silent my voice, I've got no choice..."

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] liblist.gam, gamedll bug

[Scott Pettit]

Just rename the dll and point liblist.gam to that instead...


Cheers,

Scott Pettit
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dariusz
'Officerrr' Kolasinski
Sent: Friday, 1 August 2003 1:22 p.m.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [hlds_linux] liblist.gam, gamedll bug

Witam,

Doh, today i found, that i was running metamod 1.15.2 instead of
1.16.1! "WTF?!" - i think...

Hm... some tests:

[snip]
> cat cstrike/liblist.gam
game "Counter-Strike"
url_info "www.counter-strike.net"
url_dl ""
version "1.5"
size "18400"
svonly "0"
secure "0"
type "multiplayer_only"
cldll "1"
hlversion "1110"
nomodels "1"
nohimodel "1"
mpentity "info_player_start"
gamedll "dlls\mp.dll"
gamedll_linux "addons/metamod/dlls/some_module_v.1.11.so"
trainmap "tr_1"
[/snip]

[snip]
> ./hlds_i686 -game cstrike -pingboost 1 +sv_maxupdaterate 60 +exec
server.cfg +ip 217.11.144.212 +port 27016 +maxplayers 16 +map cs_office

Console initialized.
Protocol version 46
Exe version 3.1.1.1
Exe build: 18:20:53 Jul 29 2003 (2469)
WON Auth Server
Server logging data to file logs/L0801090.log
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Log file started (file "logs/L0801090.log")
(game "cstrike") (version "46/3.1.1.1/2469")
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Log file closed
Server logging data to file logs/L0801091.log
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Log file started (file "logs/L0801091.log")
(game "cstrike") (version "46/3.1.1.1/2469")
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Server cvar "pausable" = "0"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Server cvar "sv_aim" = "0"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Server cvar "sv_maxrate" = "8000"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Server cvar "sv_minrate" = "4000"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Ban: "<><2508639><>" was banned "permanently"
by "Console"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Ban: "<><3029379><>" was banned "permanently"
by "Console"
Executing Admin Mod config file
Server IP address 217.11.144.212:27016
LoadLibrary failed on ./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so:
./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so: cannot open shared object
file: No such file or directory
Host_Error: Couldn't get DLL API from
./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so!
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: FATAL ERROR (shutting down): Host_Error:
Couldn't get DLL API from ./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so!

FATAL ERROR (shutting down): Host_Error: Couldn't get DLL API from
./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so!

Segmentation fault
[/snip]

damn! it is trying to load the some_i386.so not the
some_module_v.1.11.so!!
and WTF?! yeah! it crashed :D

running 3.1.1.1d srvr

--
Pozdrawiam,
Dariusz 'Officerrr' Kolasinski
[Linux Administrator] [gg: 516354] [uin: 8304172]
"Silent my voice, I've got no choice..."

___
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

[hlds_linux] liblist.gam, gamedll bug

[Dariusz 'Officerrr' Kolasinski]

Witam,

Doh, today i found, that i was running metamod 1.15.2 instead of
1.16.1! "WTF?!" - i think...

Hm... some tests:

[snip]
> cat cstrike/liblist.gam
game "Counter-Strike"
url_info "www.counter-strike.net"
url_dl ""
version "1.5"
size "18400"
svonly "0"
secure "0"
type "multiplayer_only"
cldll "1"
hlversion "1110"
nomodels "1"
nohimodel "1"
mpentity "info_player_start"
gamedll "dlls\mp.dll"
gamedll_linux "addons/metamod/dlls/some_module_v.1.11.so"
trainmap "tr_1"
[/snip]

[snip]
> ./hlds_i686 -game cstrike -pingboost 1 +sv_maxupdaterate 60 +exec server.cfg +ip 
> 217.11.144.212 +port 27016 +maxplayers 16 +map cs_office

Console initialized.
Protocol version 46
Exe version 3.1.1.1
Exe build: 18:20:53 Jul 29 2003 (2469)
WON Auth Server
Server logging data to file logs/L0801090.log
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Log file started (file "logs/L0801090.log") (game "cstrike") 
(version "46/3.1.1.1/2469")
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Log file closed
Server logging data to file logs/L0801091.log
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Log file started (file "logs/L0801091.log") (game "cstrike") 
(version "46/3.1.1.1/2469")
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Server cvar "pausable" = "0"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Server cvar "sv_aim" = "0"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Server cvar "sv_maxrate" = "8000"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Server cvar "sv_minrate" = "4000"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Ban: "<><2508639><>" was banned "permanently" by "Console"
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: Ban: "<><3029379><>" was banned "permanently" by "Console"
Executing Admin Mod config file
Server IP address 217.11.144.212:27016
LoadLibrary failed on ./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so: 
./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so: cannot open shared object file: No such 
file or directory
Host_Error: Couldn't get DLL API from ./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so!
L 08/01/2003 - 03:05:08: FATAL ERROR (shutting down): Host_Error: Couldn't get DLL API 
from ./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so!

FATAL ERROR (shutting down): Host_Error: Couldn't get DLL API from 
./cstrike/addons/metamod/dlls/some_i386.so!

Segmentation fault
[/snip]

damn! it is trying to load the some_i386.so not the some_module_v.1.11.so!!
and WTF?! yeah! it crashed :D

running 3.1.1.1d srvr

--
Pozdrawiam,
Dariusz 'Officerrr' Kolasinski
[Linux Administrator] [gg: 516354] [uin: 8304172]
"Silent my voice, I've got no choice..."

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] Half-Life Primary Server x.1.1.1d Beta Release

[Frank Stollar]

Steven Hartland wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Frank Stollar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
OMG! I can't believe there are admins sticking with older versions than
1.16!! Hitbox bug was awesome till this release. I did research on my
own to discover it was metamod and not WWCL-tool to blame.


I think he meant awful not awesome :P
Indeed! 8-)
Did I mention that english is not my native language? :)
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d???

[Frank Stollar]

Eric (Deacon) wrote:
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?
HLSW is nothing more than a executable. Files missing will be generated
by the first startup. I plugged it over beta3 and it works without a glitch.
cheers
Frank
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.1d Performance

[Casey Zacek]

James Sykes wrote (at Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 10:15:57AM +0100):
> Nice graphs there :)

Thanks.  I just made the code available by popular demand:

http://bfb.bogleg.org/stats/code/

It's a bit of a pain in the ass to implement, but it works for me.

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Casey Zacek
> Sent: 31 July 2003 10:00
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.1d Performance
>
>
> Casey Zacek wrote (at Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 12:52:44AM -0500):
> > Alfred Reynolds wrote (at Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 10:48:32PM -0700):
> > > If you are using "hlds" then you are still running 3.1.1.0. You need to
> run
> > > hlds_run (or hlds_$CPU directly) to run 3.1.1.1d.
> >
> > Well, gee.. no wonder the performance is the same.
> >
> > I'll post more results later, then.
>
> ... and now is later.
>
> http://bfb.bogleg.org/stats/index.cgi?g=h&s=bfb-cs1
> http://bfb.bogleg.org/stats/index.cgi?g=h&s=bfb-cs2
>
> The latter gets more play.  Anyway, the bottom graph charts CPU per
> player (percent of ONE CPU, not both).  3.1.1.1d (hlds_amd) is about
> the same as 3.1.1.0c using -pingboost 2.  I haven't asked the players
> how the pings compare, and I haven't actually played CS in months..

--
-- Casey Zacek (Zippo)  Beer for Breakfast servers
   66.111.111.66:27015 (CS multi-map) 
   66.111.111.66:27016 (CS inferno/dust2/aztec/militia) Dallas, TX
   66.111.111.66:14567 (BF1942)
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] FreeBSD Compile

[kama]

AFIK it does not mess up top... perhaps it did in some point, but that
would have been fixed ages ago..

Depends on what version of freebsd.. 4.x or 5.x..

HZ is an kernel option.

options HZ=1000

this can be done on both versions.. on 5.x you can specify the HZ with
sysctl.

for tha linproc read the 'man linprocfs'

/Bjorn

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Does messing with the HZ on FBSD make utilities like top inacurate like I
> have heard it does on linux? Also what file is this setting in on FBSD?
>
> Lastly is "options LINPROCFS" an option i going to see in the kernel
> compile? Or are you talking about setting it somewhere else?

--

You know you've been playing "Quake: Team Fortress" too much when
you ask your grandfather why they didn't rocket jump up the beaches
of Normandie.

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] FreeBSD Compile

[jeremy]

Does messing with the HZ on FBSD make utilities like top inacurate like I
have heard it does on linux? Also what file is this setting in on FBSD?

Lastly is "options LINPROCFS" an option i going to see in the kernel
compile? Or are you talking about setting it somewhere else?

Jeremy

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Steven
Hartland
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 9:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] FreeBSD Compile


> > So any recommendations on some install/kernel tweaks?
>
> I also suggest that you compile with the new ULS scheduler, instead of the
> old 4.x scheduler - I have found a huge difference in how it performs,
> although it is still classified as experimental.   If you have multiple
> processors, you need 5.1 to fully take advantage of the SMP
> enhancements, and if Hyperthreading, make sure you either compile in or
> change 'machdep.cpu_idle_hlt' to 0 so that you aren't halting logical
> CPU's.

Have you got any performance metrics on the new scheduler
I've heard some bad things about it so have stayed clear.
5.1 is defo one u want for SMP but 4.8 is quicker on single proc.
Watch out for the fact the it treats it as 4 * CPU which means that
when top shows 50% idle it is using 100% of both physical CPU's
With hyperthreading active "machdep.hlt_logical_cpus = 0" not
"machdep.cpu_idle_hlt = 0" you should get down to about 30%
idle before seeing bad effects but its very subjective.

Setting a higher HZ kernel does produced a definite decrease in
ping and increase in FPS at the experience of CPU load so you might
want to experiment with it moving it up in HZ in say 100 inc's till
your happy with it.
For HL ensure u set "stats 0" or add "options LINPROCFS" and
mount it.

Steve / K

___
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

Re: [hlds_linux] HLTV and RCON

[Daniel]

The problem is fixed.

Fall
Swedish Maffia
- Original Message -
From: "Mikkel "Miklos" Georgsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 12:32 AM
Subject: [hlds_linux] HLTV and RCON


> I know the last few days have been hectic, but whats the word on RCON in
> HLTV - it's non-working in the newer 3.1.1.1+ binaries.
>
> - Miklos
> Clanhost.dk
>
> P.S. The info about RCON and HLTV was supplied by HLTV.org staff.
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [hlds_linux] Updated - 3.1.1.1d Performance

[Michael Ressen]

> -Original Message-
> From: "Daniel Stroven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I have never manually set the sys_ticrate.  I have pingboost
> 1 enabled and Im pretty sure the kernels are compiled at
> 1000hz.  This is on RH.  Should I try putting +sys_ticrate
> 1000 in the command line?

I would as long as your kernel is compiled with it.   I'm not sure bout
redhat's defaults, but if ya wanna give it a go - throw it in there and
see what happens!   Can't hurt.

/Michael
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] Wish list - was kernel fun

[kama]

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Newman, David wrote:

>
> > >
> > > Besides, how hard could it be?  It has already been ported
> > > to Linux.
> >
> > Said like a true fluffy :P
> >
>
> I don't know what you mean by fluffy, but from my own
> programming experience it isn't dificult to write software
> that is portable between Linux, Solaris and any other
> Posix like OS.  It's not like hlds has any kernel drivers.
> What does hlds have to do?  Read some files, talk on the
> network, etc, etc.  All standard UNIX type things.  The
> only gatcha I could see would be endian issues with the
> files.  hlds _is_ using network byte order for network
> communication, isn't it?

Its not the difficult to port it that is the problem.. the problem is that
valve gets another platform to support.. which takes time and money...

let valve spend that time and money doing something useful.. like fixing
all the bugs in the game instead...

/Bjorn

--

Sometimes...in the morning...when I haven't slept...the computers
talk to me, they say "good morning dave", so I say to myself, "That
g**D**N Hal's awake!"

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

[hlds_linux] [OT] Natural Selection 2.0 client files released

[Tyler \"Overkill\" Schwend]

http://www.natural-selection.org

May I recommend GamePhilez.us for both the client and the server.
:-)

-
Tyler "[TASF]Overkill" Schwend
"Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors."
---
Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged:
Counter-Strike: telefragged.lynchburg.edu:27015
http://schwend-t.web.lynchburg.edu
http://gamephilez.us

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d???

[Eric (Deacon)]

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

[hlds_linux] HLTV and RCON

[Mikkel \"Miklos\" Georgsen]

I know the last few days have been hectic, but whats the word on RCON in
HLTV - it's non-working in the newer 3.1.1.1+ binaries.
- Miklos
Clanhost.dk
P.S. The info about RCON and HLTV was supplied by HLTV.org staff.

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] -pidfile

[Capriotti]

True. I realized that latter, but "latter" was too late.

Thank you.



At 06:12 PM 7/31/2003, you wrote:
Check that the user you run hlds as has write permission to /var/run (it
probably doesn't). The exact location of the pidfile does not matter, so its
probably easiest just to have it in the hlds  directory. Just remember to
have a different one per server.
Capriotti wrote:
>> -pidfile 
>
>
> should I use
>
> hlds_run -pingboost 2 -noipx -pidfile /var/run/cstrike.pid ...
>
> or
>
> hlds_run -pingboost 2 -noipx -pidfile cstrike.pid ...
>
> Because, the very first line, under FreeBSD, didn't generate the
> expected cstrike.pid file under the /var/run directory.
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [hlds_linux] Updated - 3.1.1.1d Performance

[Capriotti]

I've just added that to a test server I have and, while sitting idle, the
CPU usage jumped from a 9% to an 18% !
(running 3.1.1.1d here... just upgraded. And, yes, had to upgrade
MM/AM/Statsme, etc...)
FreeBSD 4.8-stable on a P3 550MHz and 512MB of ram. Pingboost 2. Did I
leave something behind ?


At 05:52 PM 7/31/2003, you wrote:
"Mikkel \"Miklos\" Georgsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> previously said:

>
>> As for the gameplay, since I compiled the kernel with 'options
>> HZ=1000' anyway, I just left that alone, and it seems to really have
>> made a big difference.   The 'stats' output in console is showing
>> framerates over 300, so it's doin it's stuff.
>
> Do you use sys_ticrate also on FreeBSD?
>
> - Miklos
> Clanhost.dk
Yes, I set +sys_ticrate 1000 in the command line.  It seems to run
smoother when it matches, or is evenly divisible by  the HZ value that
the kernel is compiled with.
/Michael

___
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

Re: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss

[Erik van den Berg]

yes after i upgraded i expierenced loss and choke too
but i have no collisions though, but the loss and choke werent occuring with
3.1.1.0c
the connection is a 100 mbit full duplex (colocated server)

- Original Message -
From: "[TRiBForCe]Hawk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss


> I am wondering (as I too am having similiar issues) if a half duplexed
> connection would cause choke and/or loss? I run a small server by most of
> you. It is an AMD 2000+ with 512 MB on a 2.6 Linux kernel, 20 ppl server
> running the latest HLDS released yesterday with adminmod, hlguard and
> statsme (latest builds of each). My cpu/memory/disk all show little or no
> bottlenecks but my nic is displaying o'plenty of collisions. Anyone seen a
> correlation between collisions and choke/loss? I should also say my pipe
is
> a half duplexed 10Mbps running sustained 1.2 - 1.4 Mbps both ways when
fully
> loaded. Suggestions? Comments? Typical flames?
> - Original Message -
> From: "Marcos Dias" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss
>
>
> > OK I will put more 2GB
> >
> > the CPU load is excellent.
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > My Dual Boxes doesn't have any kind of disk I see that this kind of
> > configuration increased the perfomance.
> >
> > But this could be a wrong impression, my clients never complains about
> > perfomance, choke and loss :-)
> >
> > But I increased the number of CS and you know what happened :-)
> > []'s
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Matt Gossage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 2:54 PM
> > Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss
> >
> >
> > > Whoa, we only run 7 servers on our dual xeon 2.4 boxes
> > > Any more than that we found reg sucked and choke + loss went up
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcos
> > > Dias
> > > Sent: 31 July 2003 18:43
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss
> > >
> > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> > > --
> > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> > > I have a Dual Xeon P4 2.4Ghz with 1GB RAM
> > >
> > > And Running 14 HLDS Servers with 14 and 20 slots but my clients told
to
> > > me that they are having a lot of choke and loss, this problem could be
> > > hapened because I need to put more memory.
> > >
> > >   2:38pm  up 2 days, 13:01,  1 user,  load average: 0,01, 0,09, 0,05
> > > 98 processes: 96 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> > > CPU0 states:  3,3% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 94,0% idle
> > > CPU1 states: 50,2% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 47,1% idle
> > > CPU2 states: 43,1% user,  0,2% system,  0,0% nice, 56,1% idle
> > > CPU3 states: 35,3% user,  1,2% system,  0,0% nice, 62,3% idle
> > > Mem:  1031876K av, 1024204K used,7672K free,   0K shrd,
0K
> > > buff
> > > 620616K actv,  388336K in_d,   0K in_c,
0K
> > > target
> > > Swap:   0K av,   0K used,   0K free
305152K
> > > cached
> > >
> > >   PID USER PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
> > >  1511 clan010   18   0 59840  58M  2456 R40,4  5,7 152:11 hlds
> > >  1873 clan018   13   0 58072  56M  2392 S35,9  5,6 132:29 hlds
> > >  1837 clan017   15   0 56028  54M  2456 S23,9  5,4 106:03 hlds
> > >  1798 clan016   13   0 62408  60M  2572 S19,3  6,0 199:09 hlds
> > >  1548 clan0119   0 56292  54M  2156 S 6,3  5,4 187:28 hlds
> > >  2871 clan020   16   0 53684  52M  2512 S 5,1  5,1  72:06 hlds
> > >  1976 clan0129   0 59224  57M  1856 S 2,7  5,7  74:21 hlds
> > >  1636 clan0139   0 47920  46M  1892 S 0,5  4,6  37:51 hlds
> > >  6194 marcos12   0  1212 1212   940 R 0,5  0,1   0:00 top
> > >  2067 clan019   10   0 58816  57M  1948 S 0,3  5,6 174:13 hlds
> > >  1715 clan0149   0 46868  45M  1884 S 0,1  4,5  33:58 hlds
> > > 1 root   9   0   484  484   420 S 0,0  0,0   0:06 init
> > > 2 root   8   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 keventd
> > > 3 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> > > ksoftirqd_CPU0
> > > 4 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> > > ksoftirqd_CPU1
> > > 5 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:02
> > > ksoftirqd_CPU2
> > > 6 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> > > ksoftirqd_CPU3
> > > 7 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   4:21 kswapd
> > > 8 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 bdflush
> > > 9 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 kupdated
> > >10 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:03 kinoded
> > >16 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:13 rpciod
> > 

Re: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss

[[TRiBForCe]Hawk]

I am wondering (as I too am having similiar issues) if a half duplexed
connection would cause choke and/or loss? I run a small server by most of
you. It is an AMD 2000+ with 512 MB on a 2.6 Linux kernel, 20 ppl server
running the latest HLDS released yesterday with adminmod, hlguard and
statsme (latest builds of each). My cpu/memory/disk all show little or no
bottlenecks but my nic is displaying o'plenty of collisions. Anyone seen a
correlation between collisions and choke/loss? I should also say my pipe is
a half duplexed 10Mbps running sustained 1.2 - 1.4 Mbps both ways when fully
loaded. Suggestions? Comments? Typical flames?
- Original Message -
From: "Marcos Dias" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss


> OK I will put more 2GB
>
> the CPU load is excellent.
>
> :-)
>
> My Dual Boxes doesn't have any kind of disk I see that this kind of
> configuration increased the perfomance.
>
> But this could be a wrong impression, my clients never complains about
> perfomance, choke and loss :-)
>
> But I increased the number of CS and you know what happened :-)
> []'s
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Matt Gossage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 2:54 PM
> Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss
>
>
> > Whoa, we only run 7 servers on our dual xeon 2.4 boxes
> > Any more than that we found reg sucked and choke + loss went up
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcos
> > Dias
> > Sent: 31 July 2003 18:43
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss
> >
> > This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> > --
> > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> > I have a Dual Xeon P4 2.4Ghz with 1GB RAM
> >
> > And Running 14 HLDS Servers with 14 and 20 slots but my clients told to
> > me that they are having a lot of choke and loss, this problem could be
> > hapened because I need to put more memory.
> >
> >   2:38pm  up 2 days, 13:01,  1 user,  load average: 0,01, 0,09, 0,05
> > 98 processes: 96 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> > CPU0 states:  3,3% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 94,0% idle
> > CPU1 states: 50,2% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 47,1% idle
> > CPU2 states: 43,1% user,  0,2% system,  0,0% nice, 56,1% idle
> > CPU3 states: 35,3% user,  1,2% system,  0,0% nice, 62,3% idle
> > Mem:  1031876K av, 1024204K used,7672K free,   0K shrd,   0K
> > buff
> > 620616K actv,  388336K in_d,   0K in_c,   0K
> > target
> > Swap:   0K av,   0K used,   0K free  305152K
> > cached
> >
> >   PID USER PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
> >  1511 clan010   18   0 59840  58M  2456 R40,4  5,7 152:11 hlds
> >  1873 clan018   13   0 58072  56M  2392 S35,9  5,6 132:29 hlds
> >  1837 clan017   15   0 56028  54M  2456 S23,9  5,4 106:03 hlds
> >  1798 clan016   13   0 62408  60M  2572 S19,3  6,0 199:09 hlds
> >  1548 clan0119   0 56292  54M  2156 S 6,3  5,4 187:28 hlds
> >  2871 clan020   16   0 53684  52M  2512 S 5,1  5,1  72:06 hlds
> >  1976 clan0129   0 59224  57M  1856 S 2,7  5,7  74:21 hlds
> >  1636 clan0139   0 47920  46M  1892 S 0,5  4,6  37:51 hlds
> >  6194 marcos12   0  1212 1212   940 R 0,5  0,1   0:00 top
> >  2067 clan019   10   0 58816  57M  1948 S 0,3  5,6 174:13 hlds
> >  1715 clan0149   0 46868  45M  1884 S 0,1  4,5  33:58 hlds
> > 1 root   9   0   484  484   420 S 0,0  0,0   0:06 init
> > 2 root   8   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 keventd
> > 3 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> > ksoftirqd_CPU0
> > 4 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> > ksoftirqd_CPU1
> > 5 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:02
> > ksoftirqd_CPU2
> > 6 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> > ksoftirqd_CPU3
> > 7 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   4:21 kswapd
> > 8 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 bdflush
> > 9 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 kupdated
> >10 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:03 kinoded
> >16 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:13 rpciod
> >   576 bin9   0   448  448   360 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 portmap
> >   596 root   9   0   548  548   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 syslogd
> >   608 root   9   0   540  540   388 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 klogd
> >   642 root   9   0   504  504   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 ypbind
> >
> > --
> >
> > ___
> > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
> > please visit:
> > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
> >
> > ---
> > Incoming mail is ce

Re: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss

[Marcos Dias]

OK I will put more 2GB

the CPU load is excellent.

:-)

My Dual Boxes doesn't have any kind of disk I see that this kind of
configuration increased the perfomance.

But this could be a wrong impression, my clients never complains about
perfomance, choke and loss :-)

But I increased the number of CS and you know what happened :-)
[]'s

- Original Message -
From: "Matt Gossage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 2:54 PM
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss


> Whoa, we only run 7 servers on our dual xeon 2.4 boxes
> Any more than that we found reg sucked and choke + loss went up
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcos
> Dias
> Sent: 31 July 2003 18:43
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> I have a Dual Xeon P4 2.4Ghz with 1GB RAM
>
> And Running 14 HLDS Servers with 14 and 20 slots but my clients told to
> me that they are having a lot of choke and loss, this problem could be
> hapened because I need to put more memory.
>
>   2:38pm  up 2 days, 13:01,  1 user,  load average: 0,01, 0,09, 0,05
> 98 processes: 96 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> CPU0 states:  3,3% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 94,0% idle
> CPU1 states: 50,2% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 47,1% idle
> CPU2 states: 43,1% user,  0,2% system,  0,0% nice, 56,1% idle
> CPU3 states: 35,3% user,  1,2% system,  0,0% nice, 62,3% idle
> Mem:  1031876K av, 1024204K used,7672K free,   0K shrd,   0K
> buff
> 620616K actv,  388336K in_d,   0K in_c,   0K
> target
> Swap:   0K av,   0K used,   0K free  305152K
> cached
>
>   PID USER PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
>  1511 clan010   18   0 59840  58M  2456 R40,4  5,7 152:11 hlds
>  1873 clan018   13   0 58072  56M  2392 S35,9  5,6 132:29 hlds
>  1837 clan017   15   0 56028  54M  2456 S23,9  5,4 106:03 hlds
>  1798 clan016   13   0 62408  60M  2572 S19,3  6,0 199:09 hlds
>  1548 clan0119   0 56292  54M  2156 S 6,3  5,4 187:28 hlds
>  2871 clan020   16   0 53684  52M  2512 S 5,1  5,1  72:06 hlds
>  1976 clan0129   0 59224  57M  1856 S 2,7  5,7  74:21 hlds
>  1636 clan0139   0 47920  46M  1892 S 0,5  4,6  37:51 hlds
>  6194 marcos12   0  1212 1212   940 R 0,5  0,1   0:00 top
>  2067 clan019   10   0 58816  57M  1948 S 0,3  5,6 174:13 hlds
>  1715 clan0149   0 46868  45M  1884 S 0,1  4,5  33:58 hlds
> 1 root   9   0   484  484   420 S 0,0  0,0   0:06 init
> 2 root   8   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 keventd
> 3 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> ksoftirqd_CPU0
> 4 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> ksoftirqd_CPU1
> 5 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:02
> ksoftirqd_CPU2
> 6 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
> ksoftirqd_CPU3
> 7 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   4:21 kswapd
> 8 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 bdflush
> 9 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 kupdated
>10 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:03 kinoded
>16 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:13 rpciod
>   576 bin9   0   448  448   360 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 portmap
>   596 root   9   0   548  548   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 syslogd
>   608 root   9   0   540  540   388 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 klogd
>   642 root   9   0   504  504   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 ypbind
>
> --
>
> ___
> 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: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 24/07/2003
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 24/07/2003
>
>
> ___
> 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

RE: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss

[Matt Gossage]

Whoa, we only run 7 servers on our dual xeon 2.4 boxes
Any more than that we found reg sucked and choke + loss went up


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcos
Dias
Sent: 31 July 2003 18:43
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I have a Dual Xeon P4 2.4Ghz with 1GB RAM

And Running 14 HLDS Servers with 14 and 20 slots but my clients told to
me that they are having a lot of choke and loss, this problem could be
hapened because I need to put more memory.

  2:38pm  up 2 days, 13:01,  1 user,  load average: 0,01, 0,09, 0,05
98 processes: 96 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU0 states:  3,3% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 94,0% idle
CPU1 states: 50,2% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 47,1% idle
CPU2 states: 43,1% user,  0,2% system,  0,0% nice, 56,1% idle
CPU3 states: 35,3% user,  1,2% system,  0,0% nice, 62,3% idle
Mem:  1031876K av, 1024204K used,7672K free,   0K shrd,   0K
buff
620616K actv,  388336K in_d,   0K in_c,   0K
target
Swap:   0K av,   0K used,   0K free  305152K
cached

  PID USER PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
 1511 clan010   18   0 59840  58M  2456 R40,4  5,7 152:11 hlds
 1873 clan018   13   0 58072  56M  2392 S35,9  5,6 132:29 hlds
 1837 clan017   15   0 56028  54M  2456 S23,9  5,4 106:03 hlds
 1798 clan016   13   0 62408  60M  2572 S19,3  6,0 199:09 hlds
 1548 clan0119   0 56292  54M  2156 S 6,3  5,4 187:28 hlds
 2871 clan020   16   0 53684  52M  2512 S 5,1  5,1  72:06 hlds
 1976 clan0129   0 59224  57M  1856 S 2,7  5,7  74:21 hlds
 1636 clan0139   0 47920  46M  1892 S 0,5  4,6  37:51 hlds
 6194 marcos12   0  1212 1212   940 R 0,5  0,1   0:00 top
 2067 clan019   10   0 58816  57M  1948 S 0,3  5,6 174:13 hlds
 1715 clan0149   0 46868  45M  1884 S 0,1  4,5  33:58 hlds
1 root   9   0   484  484   420 S 0,0  0,0   0:06 init
2 root   8   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 keventd
3 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
ksoftirqd_CPU0
4 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
ksoftirqd_CPU1
5 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:02
ksoftirqd_CPU2
6 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
ksoftirqd_CPU3
7 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   4:21 kswapd
8 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 bdflush
9 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 kupdated
   10 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:03 kinoded
   16 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:13 rpciod
  576 bin9   0   448  448   360 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 portmap
  596 root   9   0   548  548   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 syslogd
  608 root   9   0   540  540   388 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 klogd
  642 root   9   0   504  504   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 ypbind

--

___
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: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 24/07/2003


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 24/07/2003


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss

[James Sykes]

Heh - i think i can see the problem here.

You are running 14 HLDS WITH 14-20 SLOTS ?!?! You must have some magic XEONS
that are really running at 4GHZ each to pull that off - oh - and the ram
issue ? On similiar kit we fit 6-8 cs servers - usually with 1.5gb/2gb of
ram each.

James

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Marcos Dias
Sent: 31 July 2003 18:43
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I have a Dual Xeon P4 2.4Ghz with 1GB RAM

And Running 14 HLDS Servers with 14 and 20 slots but my clients told to me
that they are having a lot of choke and loss, this problem could be hapened
because I need to put more memory.

  2:38pm  up 2 days, 13:01,  1 user,  load average: 0,01, 0,09, 0,05
98 processes: 96 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU0 states:  3,3% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 94,0% idle
CPU1 states: 50,2% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 47,1% idle
CPU2 states: 43,1% user,  0,2% system,  0,0% nice, 56,1% idle
CPU3 states: 35,3% user,  1,2% system,  0,0% nice, 62,3% idle
Mem:  1031876K av, 1024204K used,7672K free,   0K shrd,   0K
buff
620616K actv,  388336K in_d,   0K in_c,   0K
target
Swap:   0K av,   0K used,   0K free  305152K
cached

  PID USER PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
 1511 clan010   18   0 59840  58M  2456 R40,4  5,7 152:11 hlds
 1873 clan018   13   0 58072  56M  2392 S35,9  5,6 132:29 hlds
 1837 clan017   15   0 56028  54M  2456 S23,9  5,4 106:03 hlds
 1798 clan016   13   0 62408  60M  2572 S19,3  6,0 199:09 hlds
 1548 clan0119   0 56292  54M  2156 S 6,3  5,4 187:28 hlds
 2871 clan020   16   0 53684  52M  2512 S 5,1  5,1  72:06 hlds
 1976 clan0129   0 59224  57M  1856 S 2,7  5,7  74:21 hlds
 1636 clan0139   0 47920  46M  1892 S 0,5  4,6  37:51 hlds
 6194 marcos12   0  1212 1212   940 R 0,5  0,1   0:00 top
 2067 clan019   10   0 58816  57M  1948 S 0,3  5,6 174:13 hlds
 1715 clan0149   0 46868  45M  1884 S 0,1  4,5  33:58 hlds
1 root   9   0   484  484   420 S 0,0  0,0   0:06 init
2 root   8   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 keventd
3 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU0
4 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU1
5 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:02 ksoftirqd_CPU2
6 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU3
7 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   4:21 kswapd
8 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 bdflush
9 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 kupdated
   10 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:03 kinoded
   16 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:13 rpciod
  576 bin9   0   448  448   360 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 portmap
  596 root   9   0   548  548   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 syslogd
  608 root   9   0   540  540   388 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 klogd
  642 root   9   0   504  504   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 ypbind

--

___
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: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss

[Marcos Dias]

Oh Sorry this is a question

This problem could happens because I need to put more memory ?

My conection is a STM-1

- Original Message -
From: "Marcos Dias" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 2:42 PM
Subject: [hlds_linux] Choke and Loss


> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> I have a Dual Xeon P4 2.4Ghz with 1GB RAM
>
> And Running 14 HLDS Servers with 14 and 20 slots but my clients told to me
that they are having a lot of choke and loss, this problem could be hapened
because I need to put more memory.
>
>   2:38pm  up 2 days, 13:01,  1 user,  load average: 0,01, 0,09, 0,05
> 98 processes: 96 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> CPU0 states:  3,3% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 94,0% idle
> CPU1 states: 50,2% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 47,1% idle
> CPU2 states: 43,1% user,  0,2% system,  0,0% nice, 56,1% idle
> CPU3 states: 35,3% user,  1,2% system,  0,0% nice, 62,3% idle
> Mem:  1031876K av, 1024204K used,7672K free,   0K shrd,   0K
buff
> 620616K actv,  388336K in_d,   0K in_c,   0K
target
> Swap:   0K av,   0K used,   0K free  305152K
cached
>
>   PID USER PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
>  1511 clan010   18   0 59840  58M  2456 R40,4  5,7 152:11 hlds
>  1873 clan018   13   0 58072  56M  2392 S35,9  5,6 132:29 hlds
>  1837 clan017   15   0 56028  54M  2456 S23,9  5,4 106:03 hlds
>  1798 clan016   13   0 62408  60M  2572 S19,3  6,0 199:09 hlds
>  1548 clan0119   0 56292  54M  2156 S 6,3  5,4 187:28 hlds
>  2871 clan020   16   0 53684  52M  2512 S 5,1  5,1  72:06 hlds
>  1976 clan0129   0 59224  57M  1856 S 2,7  5,7  74:21 hlds
>  1636 clan0139   0 47920  46M  1892 S 0,5  4,6  37:51 hlds
>  6194 marcos12   0  1212 1212   940 R 0,5  0,1   0:00 top
>  2067 clan019   10   0 58816  57M  1948 S 0,3  5,6 174:13 hlds
>  1715 clan0149   0 46868  45M  1884 S 0,1  4,5  33:58 hlds
> 1 root   9   0   484  484   420 S 0,0  0,0   0:06 init
> 2 root   8   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 keventd
> 3 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
ksoftirqd_CPU0
> 4 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
ksoftirqd_CPU1
> 5 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:02
ksoftirqd_CPU2
> 6 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00
ksoftirqd_CPU3
> 7 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   4:21 kswapd
> 8 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 bdflush
> 9 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 kupdated
>10 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:03 kinoded
>16 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:13 rpciod
>   576 bin9   0   448  448   360 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 portmap
>   596 root   9   0   548  548   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 syslogd
>   608 root   9   0   540  540   388 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 klogd
>   642 root   9   0   504  504   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 ypbind
>
> --
>
> ___
> 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

[hlds_linux] Choke and Loss

[Marcos Dias]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I have a Dual Xeon P4 2.4Ghz with 1GB RAM

And Running 14 HLDS Servers with 14 and 20 slots but my clients told to me that they 
are having a lot of choke and loss, this problem could be hapened because I need to 
put more memory.

  2:38pm  up 2 days, 13:01,  1 user,  load average: 0,01, 0,09, 0,05
98 processes: 96 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU0 states:  3,3% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 94,0% idle
CPU1 states: 50,2% user,  2,0% system,  0,0% nice, 47,1% idle
CPU2 states: 43,1% user,  0,2% system,  0,0% nice, 56,1% idle
CPU3 states: 35,3% user,  1,2% system,  0,0% nice, 62,3% idle
Mem:  1031876K av, 1024204K used,7672K free,   0K shrd,   0K buff
620616K actv,  388336K in_d,   0K in_c,   0K target
Swap:   0K av,   0K used,   0K free  305152K cached

  PID USER PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
 1511 clan010   18   0 59840  58M  2456 R40,4  5,7 152:11 hlds
 1873 clan018   13   0 58072  56M  2392 S35,9  5,6 132:29 hlds
 1837 clan017   15   0 56028  54M  2456 S23,9  5,4 106:03 hlds
 1798 clan016   13   0 62408  60M  2572 S19,3  6,0 199:09 hlds
 1548 clan0119   0 56292  54M  2156 S 6,3  5,4 187:28 hlds
 2871 clan020   16   0 53684  52M  2512 S 5,1  5,1  72:06 hlds
 1976 clan0129   0 59224  57M  1856 S 2,7  5,7  74:21 hlds
 1636 clan0139   0 47920  46M  1892 S 0,5  4,6  37:51 hlds
 6194 marcos12   0  1212 1212   940 R 0,5  0,1   0:00 top
 2067 clan019   10   0 58816  57M  1948 S 0,3  5,6 174:13 hlds
 1715 clan0149   0 46868  45M  1884 S 0,1  4,5  33:58 hlds
1 root   9   0   484  484   420 S 0,0  0,0   0:06 init
2 root   8   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 keventd
3 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU0
4 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU1
5 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:02 ksoftirqd_CPU2
6 root  19  19 00 0 SWN   0,0  0,0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU3
7 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   4:21 kswapd
8 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 bdflush
9 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:00 kupdated
   10 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:03 kinoded
   16 root   9   0 00 0 SW0,0  0,0   0:13 rpciod
  576 bin9   0   448  448   360 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 portmap
  596 root   9   0   548  548   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 syslogd
  608 root   9   0   540  540   388 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 klogd
  642 root   9   0   504  504   456 S 0,0  0,0   0:00 ypbind

--

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] Security hole known to Valve for months ??

[Emanuel Harangus]

How true you are! :(

- Original Message -
From: "wandlampe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 7:06 PM
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Security hole known to Valve for months ??


> > But indeed it would be nice to know the 'why' of not fixing it during 4
> > months of knowing this security hole. Although this exploit was not very
> > known 'out-in-the-open' it didn't mean a less serieus exploit.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Rolph Haspers
> > GameServers.Net
>
>
> Well, the guy who published the proof-of-concept-exploit did us a big
> favour i think...
>
> If he hadn't released it, Valve would have done a shit about that
> hole...
>
> Next time, perhaps a Blackhat finds the hole, and not just some nice guy
> who hasn't got any interest at all in breaking/overtaking servers...
>
> Think about it...
>
> Greetings
>
>
> ___
> 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

RE: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.1d verdict

[James Sykes]

>Does without any add-ons mean you are not running metamod. I ask as
>some people keep the hook in the liblist and forget that its loading. If it
>is ensure you have metamod 1.6+

Heh - that _would_ be a stupid mistake - thankfully my IQ is over the 5
required to figure that out - lol :)

But seriosly  - its rather bad :(

- Original Message -
From: "James Sykes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 31 July 2003 17:31
Subject: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.1d verdict


> Bad.
>
> I have been running two public servers on a dual xeon 3ghz running
slackware
> and 2.4.20 kernel.
> Cpu usage for a full 16 player server without any addons is 20% of the 1
cpu
> it is running on - so about 600mhz. Bullet registry is _very_ bad. I know
> its not a very scientific term - and is dependant on alot of things -
> however compared to a 3.1.1.0 server running on the same box its
appalling.
> Example :  standing in front of someon - empty an entire clip - its 1/5
> chance that they will die.
>
> Is anyone else having problems ? I am running the hlds_i686. So i either
> install the patch accross the board and pretend theres GOD mode enabled on
> the servers - or stick with 3.1.1.0 with the unofficial patch. Any
thoughts?
>
> James
___
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: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.1d verdict

[Marius]

> Bad.
>
> I have been running two public servers on a dual xeon 3ghz running
> slackware
> and 2.4.20 kernel.
> Cpu usage for a full 16 player server without any addons is 20% of the 1
> cpu
> it is running on - so about 600mhz. Bullet registry is _very_ bad. I know
> its not a very scientific term - and is dependant on alot of things -
> however compared to a 3.1.1.0 server running on the same box its
> appalling.
> Example :  standing in front of someon - empty an entire clip - its 1/5
> chance that they will die.
>
> Is anyone else having problems ? I am running the hlds_i686. So i either
> install the patch accross the board and pretend theres GOD mode enabled on
> the servers - or stick with 3.1.1.0 with the unofficial patch. Any
> thoughts?
>
> James

so far, good.

I'm running two public CS servers on a dual p3 800, one is the current valve
release and the other is the steam release. Both servers have 14 slots, MM
1.16 and AMX-0.94-rc8.

Since Monday I have been running 2.6.0-0.test kernels (yes, this is Linux)
and have seen a noticeable improvement in server FPS on the hlds_l server
and a decrease in CPU usage. CPU usage for each server peaks into the 50's
on heavier maps, lowest on the steam server.

This is on redhat9 so all sorts of measuring utilities like top and friends
can of course be broken.

---
marius

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] Security hole known to Valve for months ??

[Matt Gossage]

Hence why we are using the boffix_*.so fix



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Di
Schino
Sent: 31 July 2003 17:38
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Security hole known to Valve for months ??


--- wandlampe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, the guy who published the proof-of-concept-exploit did us a big
> favour i think...
>
> If he hadn't released it, Valve would have done a shit about that
> hole...
>
> Next time, perhaps a Blackhat finds the hole, and not just some nice
> guy
> who hasn't got any interest at all in breaking/overtaking servers...
>
> Think about it...
>
> Greetings

Yeah, i consider it a humongous favor being forced to move to x.1.1.x
when it is known for excessive cpu usage, and there still is no
measurable proof that the cpu usage is back to x.1.1.0x levels. Don't
get me wrong, im all for security, and pressuring vendors to fix their
code, and pivx *did* give them a longer turnaround window than most
exploit hunters. I just wish the priority for valve would be to
baseline their cpu usage. as others have said, a trade off would be
worth it, give some grand new feature that make up for the cpu usage,
that we can turn off.

ultimately valve, you can patch security holes at your leisure, and
people will flame, then forget. But one thing that a lot of us admins
won't stop harping on is increased CPU usage.
___
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: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 24/07/2003


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 24/07/2003


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.1d verdict

[Steven Hartland]

Does without any add-ons mean you are not running metamod. I ask as
some people keep the hook in the liblist and forget that its loading. If it
is ensure you have metamod 1.6+
- Original Message -
From: "James Sykes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 31 July 2003 17:31
Subject: [hlds_linux] 3.1.1.1d verdict


> Bad.
>
> I have been running two public servers on a dual xeon 3ghz running slackware
> and 2.4.20 kernel.
> Cpu usage for a full 16 player server without any addons is 20% of the 1 cpu
> it is running on - so about 600mhz. Bullet registry is _very_ bad. I know
> its not a very scientific term - and is dependant on alot of things -
> however compared to a 3.1.1.0 server running on the same box its appalling.
> Example :  standing in front of someon - empty an entire clip - its 1/5
> chance that they will die.
>
> Is anyone else having problems ? I am running the hlds_i686. So i either
> install the patch accross the board and pretend theres GOD mode enabled on
> the servers - or stick with 3.1.1.0 with the unofficial patch. Any thoughts?
>
> James
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] Security hole known to Valve for months ??

[Tony Di Schino]

--- wandlampe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, the guy who published the proof-of-concept-exploit did us a big
> favour i think...
>
> If he hadn't released it, Valve would have done a shit about that
> hole...
>
> Next time, perhaps a Blackhat finds the hole, and not just some nice
> guy
> who hasn't got any interest at all in breaking/overtaking servers...
>
> Think about it...
>
> Greetings

Yeah, i consider it a humongous favor being forced to move to x.1.1.x
when it is known for excessive cpu usage, and there still is no
measurable proof that the cpu usage is back to x.1.1.0x levels. Don't
get me wrong, im all for security, and pressuring vendors to fix their
code, and pivx *did* give them a longer turnaround window than most
exploit hunters. I just wish the priority for valve would be to
baseline their cpu usage. as others have said, a trade off would be
worth it, give some grand new feature that make up for the cpu usage,
that we can turn off.

ultimately valve, you can patch security holes at your leisure, and
people will flame, then forget. But one thing that a lot of us admins
won't stop harping on is increased CPU usage.
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] Half-Life Primary Server x.1.1.1d Beta Release

[Mad Scientist]

According to the great words of Frank Stollar:
> OMG! I can't believe there are admins sticking with older versions than
> 1.16!! Hitbox bug was awesome till this release.

However, the hitbox bug does not affect all mods, which is why not
everybody needed to upgrade.

-Mad

--
"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a
proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven."

– Prime Minister Jean Chrétien


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

[hlds_linux] 3.1.1.1d verdict

[James Sykes]

Bad.

I have been running two public servers on a dual xeon 3ghz running slackware
and 2.4.20 kernel.
Cpu usage for a full 16 player server without any addons is 20% of the 1 cpu
it is running on - so about 600mhz. Bullet registry is _very_ bad. I know
its not a very scientific term - and is dependant on alot of things -
however compared to a 3.1.1.0 server running on the same box its appalling.
Example :  standing in front of someon - empty an entire clip - its 1/5
chance that they will die.

Is anyone else having problems ? I am running the hlds_i686. So i either
install the patch accross the board and pretend theres GOD mode enabled on
the servers - or stick with 3.1.1.0 with the unofficial patch. Any thoughts?

James


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Frank
Stollar
Sent: 31 July 2003 17:16
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d???


JC | KrUCiaL | Gamerezo.com wrote:
>>as you can see in this image the server runns for 40 seconds and seems
>>to be down every 40 seconds for 20 seconds - but the server is NOT
>>crashed - players are still connected and the have no lags or
>>timeouts...
>
>
> 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.

cheers
Frank


___
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: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] problem with 3.1.1.1d???

[Frank Stollar]

JC | KrUCiaL | Gamerezo.com wrote:
as you can see in this image the server runns for 40 seconds and seems
to be down every 40 seconds for 20 seconds - but the server is NOT
crashed - players are still connected and the have no lags or
timeouts...


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.
cheers
Frank
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

RE: [hlds_linux] Security hole known to Valve for months ??

[wandlampe]

> But indeed it would be nice to know the 'why' of not fixing it during 4
> months of knowing this security hole. Although this exploit was not very
> known 'out-in-the-open' it didn't mean a less serieus exploit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rolph Haspers
> GameServers.Net


Well, the guy who published the proof-of-concept-exploit did us a big
favour i think...

If he hadn't released it, Valve would have done a shit about that
hole...

Next time, perhaps a Blackhat finds the hole, and not just some nice guy
who hasn't got any interest at all in breaking/overtaking servers...

Think about it...

Greetings


___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux

Re: [hlds_linux] Half-Life Primary Server x.1.1.1d Beta Release

[Steven Hartland]

- Original Message -
From: "Frank Stollar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> OMG! I can't believe there are admins sticking with older versions than
> 1.16!! Hitbox bug was awesome till this release. I did research on my
> own to discover it was metamod and not WWCL-tool to blame.

I think he meant awful not awesome :P

Steve / K
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux