Re: [Circle] [NEWBIE] Running Under Win95

From: Brian Pape (
Date: 08/21/96

> 3. Stability
>  I hope your not talking about Linux. I have had more Kernel Panic's then
> General Protection Faults.

impala:~$ uptime
  9:43pm  up 153 days, 5:43,  19 users,  load average: 0.96, 0.80, 0.65

that server runs many different services, from irc to a muds to a web
server.  It serves several hundred megabytes of data a day.  If you are
getting lots of kernel panics, you need to re-evaluate how you installed
your system.

> 4. Win95/NT Require More Resources
>  True, and so does xwindows. This is called development. If better
> computers are built, why not take advantage of it? 

cpu-for-cpu, memory-for-memory, linux is a lot more efficient, especially
in network code, which is what you need for a muds.  You don't run your
muds in a GUI- my muds server doesn't even run X.

> Sure, it's no argument that linux outruns win95 as a production mud
> server; but it is also no argument that linux can hardly do much else.

I haven't noticed...  only thing win95 does better is um...  um...  line
micro$oft's pockets.

Reign of Towers

| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
|   |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/07/00 PST