the point is that you dont have to waste time configuring it so it works
with your OS which ca be both frustrating and annoying.... and no systems
do not vary much at all. right now on the market there is basically
microsoft (windows), and the bunch of small groups that create OS's like
redhat as well as the 50 million of tasty flvors of Linux, and then there
is Unix. the compilers that go with Unix and Linux come built in (i think),
and for windows you have either visual c++ 4.x/5.0 or borland c++. (i am
now prepared for recieving spam for this cuz i made some sort of error or i
didnt include Amiga or some other OS).
-dmitri
p.s. if you are going to complain about that thing u guys call quoting...
bring it on.... I LOVE IT!!!!!!
At 02:08 PM 12/2/97 -0500, you wrote:
>>precompiled MUDs do not necessarily mean they have to be stock muds, ...the
>yes they do :P
>>reason i suggested it is because it has already been configured to compile
>>correctly under windows 95.... from there you can create your own rooms, as
>>well as go through the code (which is included) and recompile it.
>Well, if one was going to do that, what is the sense is getting a precompiled
>MUD? Systems vary so much.
>
>
> +------------------------------------------------------------+
> | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
> | http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
> +------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| 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