[MUD-Dev] Preference for host OS

[Fred Clift]

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Jeremy Noetzelman wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Brian Hook wrote:
 
>>   - OpenBSD
>>   - FreeBSD
 
> I've used both, and my preference is FreeBSD.  It's been rock
> solid, but OpenBSD is as well.  We found bugs in the server code
> easier on *BSD than on Linux, primarily due to the way they handle
> memory

We've been running a mud on FreeBSD for a few years now (previously
linux, solaris, aix) - other than the lousy SMP support (mud is
single-threaded so it wouldnt' be using the other cpu anyway...) I
quite like FreeBSD.  It is relatively secure (of course you can do
what you like to make it more secure...), relatively easy to set up
if you know unix etc.  I particularly like the 'ports' collection
where you can easily install hundreds of public-domain packages by
doing no more than typeing 'make install' in the right directory.

However, I'm biased in that I use FreeBSD at work too, and I'm not
the typical user (I do OS level system programming).

If you had a preference for some other unix, I would say that you
should go for whatever you are familiar with -- as long as you know
(or have someone who knows) the details of securing a box on the
internet.  Security considerations require some savy.

Another thing I like about FreeBSD (or linux or solaris x86) is that
I can run it on my laptop and have a working test copy of my mud on
it for development when I dont have network access.  I have an
identical build environment, and a bunch of scripted client stuff so
I can effectively build and test new features, debug problems, etc.
Having the same os on my laptop as on the server makes this much
easier. (a lowly pentium 166 purchased off ebay for under $300 :)

Fred

--
Fred Clift - fred at clift.org -- Remember: If brute 
force doesn't work, you're just not using enough.

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev