Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Discussion on running your own board and editing MajorMUD.
Post Reply
Raybdbomb
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:53 pm

Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by Raybdbomb »

I see some MajorBBS packages for linux, but before I go too far down this path, has anyone attempted to host WG or MajorBBS with Majormud from a command-line-only linux server?


User avatar
rytz
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:53 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by rytz »

There was a Worldgroup 1.0 version for Unix which is floating around, but haven't messed with it myself.

I've been testing Worldgroup 1 & 2 (DOS) against VirtualBox, VMWare, and DosBox, and they all have different problems. Mostly networking and response times. Some straight up crashing.

You're probably better off trying DOSEMU for linux with Worldgroup 2.0 / MajorMUD. It's something I'm looking forward to trying. Worldgroup 1.0 doesn't have the built in telnet server, and Vircom's MajorTCP module is laggy and slow with telnet connections. The Worldgroup 2.0 built-in telnet server has its own problems with networking, but at least its fast. I'm gonna have to do a write up soon of all my findings.


User avatar
MiOw
Posts: 113
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 7:40 pm

Re: Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by MiOw »

Forgive me the simple question, but is the goal to resurrect legacy versions of MMUD and other software, or is this just for the challenge...? ;)


ClassicMUD... lightly seasoned with no dupes!
www.mudinfo.net/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2357
User avatar
rytz
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:53 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by rytz »

There's an advantage, in my opinion, to being able to run a DOS version of MajorMUD on Linux in that you don't have to worry about the overhead of installing Windows on a VM or dealing with WINE issues. DosBox will also run MajorMUD through MBBS/WG. Haven't tried DOSEMU yet.

And there's always something to say for the challenge, I suppose...


User avatar
BearFather
Posts: 652
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 6:27 pm
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Re: Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by BearFather »

I know the unix version of MMBS/WG won't run mud. The dll crashes. I tried quickly with dos version of mud and gave up quickly.

I was interested to try to run mud boards off a pi.


User avatar
rytz
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:53 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by rytz »

Some good news on the Linux front: I spent the last week or so trying to get a stable VM of MS-DOS with WG2.0/MMUD up and running. I tried VirtualBox, VMWare, DosBox, DosEmu, QEmu and different versions from each. The only one that has solid networking and is fast and stable enough is QEmu, surprisingly. Runs great with the right configuration. I'll do a small write-up soon on my findings and the problems I ran into with each.


Bloodrock
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by Bloodrock »

might also for what your playing with is which linux distro your useing straight ubuntu will use more resources than lubuntu i my self use lubuntu cuz it's very light on resources have 8 g memory so no big deal bbs itself is a vm over mint mate
as for cpu usage i have set my comp to use the cpu virtual whatever in the system bios but when i try to set virtual box to use more than 1 cpu on a quad core system vb says not supported


User avatar
rytz
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:53 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by rytz »

Bloodrock wrote:might also for what your playing with is which linux distro your useing straight ubuntu will use more resources than lubuntu i my self use lubuntu cuz it's very light on resources have 8 g memory so no big deal bbs itself is a vm over mint mate
I tried on a lightweight Slackware distro (Vector) and Lubuntu. I'm a fan of the lighter linux distros.

I tested all applicable softwares with accelerated virtualization (VT-X) enabled. Any time accelerated virtualization is involved, the timings and responses of the BBS get really weird. Usually starting off really fast, then coming to a halt. Without accelerated virtualization or multi-cpu, all of them, except QEMU, are too slow either with general processing or with networking. I'm running a newer Intel i7 system too.
Bloodrock wrote:as for cpu usage i have set my comp to use the cpu virtual whatever in the system bios but when i try to set virtual box to use more than 1 cpu on a quad core system vb says not supported
In VirtualBox, to use the accelerated virtualization (VT-X/AMD-V), you have to enable "I/O APIC". To use multi-CPUs, you need "I/O APIC" and VT-X/AMD-V enabled.


Raybdbomb
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:53 pm

Re: Anyone tried to host mud from linux?

Post by Raybdbomb »

rytz wrote:Some good news on the Linux front: I spent the last week or so trying to get a stable VM of MS-DOS with WG2.0/MMUD up and running. I tried VirtualBox, VMWare, DosBox, DosEmu, QEmu and different versions from each. The only one that has solid networking and is fast and stable enough is QEmu, surprisingly. Runs great with the right configuration. I'll do a small write-up soon on my findings and the problems I ran into with each.
Can't wait to see the write-up.


Post Reply