Anticheat and Linux i386

[R3Z3T]

Hello

First of all, I want to congratulate R1CH for his great work in the anticheat module.
Second: When a anticheat module for Linux platform? (Currently I'm @ SuSe Linux, and the most Linux-Quakers uses Suse ).

Thanks in advance
Signed,
5Qr.R3Z3T

[R1CH]

Unfortunately there will not be an anticheat module for Linux.

[R3Z3T]

Unfortunately there will not be an anticheat module for Linux.

Argh, why not? :>

[R3Z3T]

Ops, sorry double-posting

It's so simple as ./configure && make && sudo make install ... But since you don't want to release the source-code you can distribute the binaries to each distro. In this case you would do it to the most used Unix distros, such as SuSe, Fedora, Ubuntu...

Cheers,
5Qr.R3Z3T

[R1CH]

I don't think there is a big enough...

[WHO]

Unfortunately there will not be an anticheat module for Linux.

Nooooooooo ... been waiting  n waiting ... /me cries for the dozen or so q2 servers we have running.

PLease feel free to reconsider wont you R1CH

[R1CH]

The module is only required for clients, not servers.

[WHO]

soo .. you're saying what?

a linux server can be in the anticheat network then?

i had/have it in my head that it's only been available for win servers :/ .. would dearly love to get our linux box involved, mmmm donuts

[R1CH]

Yes, if you look for anticheat servers in ASE you'll see almost all of them are Linux based.

[TgT]

A man discovered a water...

[R3Z3T]

I think you should port the anticheat.dll from windows to linux..Lot of quakers uses Linux and that would be a shame if we couldn't enter in some servers because we are 'cheaters'...You don't need to release the source-code..It's just a matter of compiling and host it ...

[R1CH]

Maybe you don't get it. You cannot simply compile something and expect it to work on another OS when the other OS does not have 90% of the APIs or structures or other functions and things you use and has a completely different executable and DLL structure. That's not even mentioning the huge differences between every install of Linux, making binary compatibility a nightmare. It simply isn't going to happen.

For example, try compiling WinMerge on Linux yourself and see what kind of problems you run into.

[R3Z3T]

Well...I compiled Action Quake 2 and it works perfectly

[R1CH]

Probably because Action Quake 2 was designed to be cross platform compatible and requires no platform specific API calls.

[QwazyWabbit]

Designing for cross-platform is a tough job. Just take a look at some of the Linux/*nix/BSD/OS-X code or especially some of the older Unix to Linux ports and you will see all kinds of strange and wonderful and not so wonderful kinks to make it all work. There are some pretty goofy things done in the Q2 code to make it portable and you can even see some problems people are having getting the Q2 code to compile on BSD using the Linux code. AQ2 "works perfectly" because somebody knew the target environment and spent a great deal of time making it work right. Linux debugging is not fun, GDB is not a fun debugger to play with compared to what can be done in Visual Studio. Religious zealots will no doubt come out of the woodwork here but I can tell you from working with VC/VS and GDB and a host of other debuggers on many other platforms that VS is almost nirvana compared to most command line debuggers. R1ch's specialty is not *nix so unless he designed the whole DLL from the ground up without depending on special Windows API's then it will be very hard to port the code to *nix. I know what his design goals were so I can tell you the job of porting it will not be trivial and will require intimate knowledge of the guts of the *nix platforms.