[Shadow]

I am planning to run a mud off of my computer with a cable internet connection.  I need to find a compiler that can compile a mud , but can also be accessed by another coder from a different computer.  I looked ad RedHat Linux 7.3 (not even sure if it has remote access) and since its 900mb it turned me off. Id like to find a compiler that has remote access, but doesnt take up around a gig.  If there are none that dont take up a lot of space, could someone direct me to a compiler that at least has remote access?

[thelenian]

RedHat 7.3 is a GNU/Linux distro, which is an entire operating system + more programs and dev tools than you'll ever make use of. When installing just choose custom install and take out lots of the dev packages... that should lower the size of the installation considerably. Just remember to install the sshd (do NOT let your developers get shell access to your MUD over telnet!. And yes, any GNU/Linux distro has more capability for secure (inasmuch as you can be secure when connected to an untrusted network) remote access than any version of Windows.

Because GNU/Linux is an operating system, you'll have to either dual-boot, selecting whether you'll be running Windows or GNU/Linux each time you boot up, or, preferably, just format your Windows partition and run GNU/Linux exclusively .

[Ogma]

The compiler and remote access are really two separate issues. What you want is an operating system which will allow Secure Shell access (the sshd that Thelenian mentions). Just about any flavor of free Un*x will allow this. Red Hat is a good choice. There are many other distros of Linux which you can get: Debian, Slackware and SuSe just to name a few of the better known and well established. You can also try, FreeBSD, although I'm a Linux promoter.

There are a couple of freeware compilers and dev environments for Windoze systems which would allow you to compile a mud, Cygwin and DJGPP are the most popular. These are kludges at best, attempting to port Un*x tools and operating environment onto a Microsoft platform.

Almost all mud servers are developed on a POSIX system and depend on having the tools available to them from compilers and make progrmas clear down to the bash shell (command line interpreter).

One nice thing about one of the free Unices is that they are far less greedy for resources so you can run one on a system which is a few years old quite happily. You could even bring it up in a mode without the graphical desktop which is unneccessary for running a mud.

[Robbert]

(The more I use this Ikonboard the more pleased I am with its versatility, intuitivity, and overall design)

Just as Ogma said,

Originally Posted by One nice thing about one of the free Unices is that they are far less greedy for resources so you can run one on a system which is a few years old quite happily. You could even bring it up in a mode without the graphical desktop which is unneccessary for running a mud.

Show me a MUD which NEEDS 2ghz of proecessing power and I'll show you a programmer who needs to be shot.

Most MUDs, if they are programmed efficiently, will occupy a footprint of less than 1/100th the processing power provided by machines these days. Average draw of the one for which I work is 25mhz, with a peak of just over 100, and a low of 5 or so. Startup, of course, takes quite a bit (faster machines start up faster, go figure!, as does compiling - the only two times a fast machine is really relevant.

In todays age, most hosts sell you only a portion of their system. MUD hosts, which are available for as little as 10 dollars a month, could most likely provide you what you need, and better than you could yourself. (Although, I am a FIRM advocate of putting linux on household machines). Kyndig's hosting services are, bar none, the best I've found and are reasonable in cost, especially for those initial startup MUDs.

If you're serious about developing a MUD, I highly recommend you move from the Cygwin/DJGPP platform to any flavor of Linux or Unix.

(EDIT - Correct figures)