Can't the timeout be adjusted instead of completely ignored?
Kind regards, Saul Rennison On 23 December 2012 19:58, Asher Baker <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Nomaan Ahmad <[email protected]> wrote: > > You should update it Asher :P > > It's method is fundamentally unstable, it can't be fixed. It "works" > by bypassing the timeout on edict reuse, allowing them to be > reallocated before the engine considers it safe. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
