Hello Alan.

13 Sep 05 17:46, you wrote to Maurice Kinal:

MK>> Right.  Maximus is a DOS program.  No multi-anything.  It might
MK>> be possible to farm out each call to dosemu but why bother if
MK>> each call starts a process that is a bloated and independent as
MK>> the first?  Also that would make it virtually impossible to do
MK>> multinodal activities such as head-to-head gaming, chatting and
MK>> the such.  Also there is little security in dosemu so you're
MK>> gambling putting stuff like that up for grabs to a remote.  Also
MK>> dosemu doesn't work on 2.6 kernels (thank goodness ).

Despite Maurice's usual unfounded bias, he is completely incorrect about
DOSEMU not working with 2.6 kernels.  Mine is working quite well and has
been for several months under a 2.6 kernel.

MK>> It won't work with 2.6 kernels.  Also much of the functionality
MK>> of Synchronet is better done by just employing the native Linux
MK>> equivalents of what Synchronet wants to give you, such as ftpd,

Again Maurice does not have his facts correct.  Synchronet works quite well
under a 2.6 kernel.  And has been for months here.

Perhaps you are refering to the issue with Fedora Core 3?  That was an
issue with glibc that Fedora borked for that release.  This issue was not
Synchonet's fault but Fedora's.  It was resolved for FC4 release.

AI|> Do you mean Synchronet won't work with 2.6 kernels or DOSEMU? I
AI|> can't get synchronet to build at the moment too, I wonder if it's
AI|> because of the kernel? At the moment I am trying to get it going
AI|> on an amd64 machine so I thought that might have something to do
AI|> with it, or maybe it's the 2.6.8-amd64 kernel??

Unfortuantely Maurice has an unusally nasty bias against Synchronet and
anything that does not conform to his views of how thing should be. 
Sometimes he has a good idea.  Other times he is just plain irrational on a
subject.

You might want to take that into consideration.

Robert

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5