Hi Jeff, thanks for your suggestion. I was indeed already aware you could chain config files this way, but this isn't what I'm looking for. The reason I'm reporting this bug and want to have this functionality is for example when you're stacking multiple TF2 servers on one piece of hardware. I use one config file (with some others exec'ed from it as you suggest) to set the gamemode (cp, cfg, mvm), config replays, logging, etc. Then I want to exec another one from the command line which has the server identity in it, since this has to be different for every instance you start.
If anyone has a suggestion for another way of doing this in a nice, modular fashion, please let me know. Regards, Rudy On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Jeff Sugar <[email protected]> wrote: > For what it's worth, if you want a workaround, you can make a main cfg file > that exec's the other configs you wish to execute. > > So, "myconfigfile.cfg" could contain... > exec config1.cfg > exec otherconfig.cfg > exec onemore.cfg > > I don't know if you were looking for a workaround in addition to reporting > the bug, or just reporting it, but I figured I'd mention it just in case. > For all I know, you've already set it up like the above, but still wanted > to make the list/Valve aware of it. > > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Rudy Bleeker <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm sorry if what I'm about to write is a known bug, but I couldn't >> find anything about it on the internet. >> >> I was messing around with different server configs this weekend and >> noticed some strange behaviour when feeding the srcds_run script >> multiple +exec arguments. So I put some "say" lines into the config >> files for debugging and I found that when you try to execute multiple >> config files this way, only the first one you specify gets executed. >> The cvars in any consecutive config files you specify with a +exec are >> never set, instead the first config file you specified gets executed >> another time, once for every +exec command present in your startup >> line. I've tested this with up to 3 arguments. >> >> I know that all the + arguments given to the srcds_run script are >> passed on directly to the srcds_linux binary, so to the best of my >> knowledge the bug should not be in the script (unless there is some >> limitation to /bin/sh and the shift buildin that I don't know about) >> but in the way the binary handles it's input arguments. I was hoping >> someone at Valve could shed some light on this. >> >> Regards, Rudy >> >> -- >> Idleness is not doing nothing. Idleness is being free to do anything. >> - Floyd Dell >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >> please visit: >> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >> > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit: > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux -- Idleness is not doing nothing. Idleness is being free to do anything. - Floyd Dell _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
