Re: [hlds_linux] exe build: 12:02:12 Jun 22 2006 (2784)

2006-06-30 Thread John Sheu
On Friday 30 June 2006 4:43 am, kama wrote: > Gah, too simple... > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Alfred Reynolds wrote: > > That number is the number of days since HL1 was released. We don't really > > use it any longer, internally we use perforce changelist numbers and > > externally we use Steam depot v

Re: [hlds_linux] exe build: 12:02:12 Jun 22 2006 (2784)

2006-06-30 Thread Evaldas Žilinskas
Well, having a built number is a great. But the main thing is that after the "Day of Defeat" update built number raised from 2752 to 2784. It has something related with the game, because new maps don't work with 2752. So the question would be, what's new in this built and is it necessary to upda

Re: [hlds_linux] SZ_GetSpace: overflow on Client Datagram

2006-06-30 Thread Despise at home
The problem here is about packets being either chopped up or not sent = you get seconds in delay. usually its to do with the rates of the server, so for instance if you are running a high sv_maxupdaterate with a low sv_maxrate this will cause the delay. If its not that then the next thing to check

Re: [hlds_linux] exe build: 12:02:12 Jun 22 2006 (2784)

2006-06-30 Thread Ondřej Hošek
Seconded. Try moving to "ln(perforce_build * (1337 * unix_timestamp))". ;-) ~~ Ondra kama wrote: Gah, too simple... On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Alfred Reynolds wrote: That number is the number of days since HL1 was released. We don't really use it any longer, internally we use perforce changelist

RE: [hlds_linux] exe build: 12:02:12 Jun 22 2006 (2784)

2006-06-30 Thread kama
Gah, too simple... On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Alfred Reynolds wrote: > That number is the number of days since HL1 was released. We don't really use > it any longer, internally we use perforce changelist numbers and externally > we use Steam depot versions. Still, doesn't hurt to have it lying aroun

Re: [hlds_linux] SZ_GetSpace: overflow on Client Datagram

2006-06-30 Thread Erik Hollensbe
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 17:27 +1200, Andrew Forsberg wrote: > Just searched my list archives. There are several suggestions, nothing > confirmed: > 1) you are using a map with too many spawn points (that suggestion > sounds spurious) > 2) it just happens, ignore it (groan, that sounds familiar) > 3)