Porting Circle

From: Gary Barnett (gbarnett@POLARNET.COM)
Date: 07/25/97

I am pondering porting circle to Netware.

Ok.. Now that you've either fallen off your chair
and gotten back on it.. or repaired your busted
gut from laughing too hard, I'll get on with my post.

Porting Issues

1) Netware supports and implements the ansi c library.

2) There is support for socket I/O.

3) Remote control is handled via the rconsole utility
and there does exist suitable debugging tools.

4) Memory Protection  - It is possible to write a Netware
NLM that fully supports memory partitioning and can
detect out of bounds memory writes/reads, etc.

5) Standard tools are now supported. The reliance upon
the Watcom c++ compiler is no longer an issue.


1) Ability to manage the server via an encyrpted link, or
a VPN..

2) A high performance engine for running apps. Netware
makes for a high speed server. For those that don't believe
this claim, look at their web server and java engine. It rocks!

3) Obscurity.. not many people have the knowledge to
find holes in Netware. Netware is also capable of B2
operation as a secure file server, though I wouldn't
be configuring it for that mode of operation.

4) NDS would provide an idea method of allowing
    gods and others to have the exact account access
    that you wish, via mapped drives or ftp access.

 5) Binary compatibility -- the same NLM will run on all
 Netware servers.


  1) Lack of a multi-user character based administration
  module.. all rconsole users share the same session, and
  that session is only useful for starting/stopping/debugging
  the mud.

  Thoughts? Anyone tried it recently? Would anyone run
  a mud as an NLM on a Netware server if the code were

--Mallory (An MCNE.. and a longtime Netware evangalist)

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST