Services and Bots

Spreegem · Post by **Spreegem** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 10:57 am

What services do you suggest using with Unreal IRCD?
Also what bot would you suggest using with Unreal IRCD?

Thank You in advance.

AngryWolf · Post by **AngryWolf** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 1:51 pm

For the first question:
What question is answered in the topic Announcement: Recommended Services?

aquanight · Post by **aquanight** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:02 pm

And as to the second, you'll hardly need bots if you have services, since anything you can code bots to do, services can be coded do better because they are U:Line'd

.

Otherwise, go to google and type in IRC Bot - there's a pretty good one in the number 2 hit

.

Spreegem · Post by **Spreegem** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 6:37 pm

Thank You both!

null · Post by **null** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:42 pm

Currently the best for Unreal3.2 would be IRCServices. Anope and other services haven't yet been updated to support anything past Unreal3.1.x.

jewles · Post by **jewles** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 11:44 pm

pfff good thing I saw this....

Unreal works with most services.... but irc services work the best....

irc services doesn't include a botserv (A MAJOR REASON I LIKE EM)

if you want a "serious bot" you should probably check out eggdrops... they are easy to edit, manage, do virtually anything you really need.... fun stuff dudes

codemastr · Post by **codemastr** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 4:04 am

Currently the best for Unreal3.2 would be IRCServices. Anope and other services haven't yet been updated to support anything past Unreal3.1.x.

That statement is grossly inaccurate. I talk to the Anope coders almost every day and they are constantly working to add support for new features in Unreal and all the other IRCds it supports. Anope works perfectly fine with 3.2.

w00t · Post by **w00t** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 7:01 am

jewles wrote:irc services doesn't include a botserv (A MAJOR REASON I LIKE EM)

Also grossly innacurate

One is in the works, check the ircservices support link in my sig. When its done, it'll be up there.

Check every few weeks, as im really busy.

null · Post by **null** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 4:39 pm

codemastr wrote:That statement is grossly inaccurate. I talk to the Anope coders almost every day and they are constantly working to add support for new features in Unreal and all the other IRCds it supports. Anope works perfectly fine with 3.2.

Not really. Just try using any of Unreal3.2's new/changed features with Anope, ie a/q prefixes, SSL, channel modes f/A/O/a/q/z/T (these are just the ones off the top of my head, there are a few more).. Anope doesn't properly support any of these.

codemastr · Post by **codemastr** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 4:59 pm

Not really. Just try using any of Unreal3.2's new/changed features with Anope, ie a/q prefixes, SSL, channel modes f/A/O/a/q/z (these are just the ones off the top of my head, there are a few more).. Anope doesn't properly support any of these.

Again, false info. Prefixes have NOTHING to do with services. They are only sent to clients, NOT servers. So whether Anope handles & and ~ is irrelevant, and for the record IRCServices has no code to handle it either.

You are right, Anope doesn't support SSL, and neither does IRCServices.

Channel modes, uhh no. I just downloaded Anope 1.6.2, the latest stable release. I then opened channels.c:

{ CMODE_A, CBM_NO_USER_MLOCK, NULL, NULL },
- Chmode +A, and note, it even prevents regular users from setting mlock +A.

{ CMODE_O, CBM_NO_USER_MLOCK, NULL, NULL },
- Chmode +O, again, prevents regular users from mlocking it.

{ CMODE_z, 0, NULL, NULL },
- Chmode +z.

Now for +aq,
static int do_owner(User * u)
- Sets the user as +q. This is done when you /cs identify.

{ "DEPROTECT", "!deprotect", "-a", 0 , CA_PROTECT, CA_PROTECTME },
{ "PROTECT", "!protect", "+a", 0 , CA_PROTECT, CA_PROTECTME },
- Channel commands to set +/-a

Those are just some examples where +q/+a are used.

Please don't make things up when you don't know what you are talking about.

null · Post by **null** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 11:20 pm

codemastr wrote:Again, false info. Prefixes have NOTHING to do with services. They are only sent to clients, NOT servers. So whether Anope handles & and ~ is irrelevant

That's why Anope still sets users +qo & +ao right? (+q & +a is all that's needed with prefixes enabled)

Modes AOz: I still think support is not the best it could be. For instance, IRCServices kick/bans users without the correct credentials when they join an emtpy channel mlocked +AOz. Anope does not. This can be a big pain especially for mode z because Unreal won't allow it to be set with non-secure users on the channel.

I went ahead and tested all the modes with the mlock feature: Anope absolutely DOES NOT support the new mode f format, or modes M or T. Another flaw I found is that it allows the non-existant mode H to be mlocked.

codemastr · Post by **codemastr** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 11:45 pm

That's why Anope still sets users +qo & +ao right? (+q & +a is all that's needed with prefixes enabled)

And how is Anope supposed to know whether prefixes were enabled or not?

Modes AOz: I still think support is not the best it could be. For instance, IRCServices kick/bans users without the correct credentials when they join an emtpy channel mlocked +AOz. Anope does not. This can be a big pain especially for mode z because Unreal won't allow it to be set with non-secure users on the channel.

Well something "being a pain" doesn't make it unusable with 3.2.

I went ahead and tested all the modes with the mlock feature: Anope absolutely DOES NOT support the new mode f format, or modes M or T. Another flaw I found is that it allows the non-existant mode H to be mlocked.

Again, none of that makes it unusable.

aquanight · Post by **aquanight** » Sun Jun 13, 2004 1:59 am

But this also doesn't make it 100% compatible with 3.2

. Of course, it's my understanding this is to be fixed soon

. If I'm wrong, then this post doesn't exist.

null · Post by **null** » Sun Jun 13, 2004 2:23 am

And how is Anope supposed to know whether prefixes were enabled or not?

Well, maybe if you guys would make up your damn mind and standardize it already, we wouldn't have this problem.

It shouldn't have been a changeable option in the first place....

codemastr · Post by **codemastr** » Sun Jun 13, 2004 4:26 pm

Well, maybe if you guys would make up your damn mind and standardize it already, we wouldn't have this problem.
It shouldn't have been a changeable option in the first place....

Well, that's your opinion. I can assure you if I put it to a vote, it would not be 99% agree with you, it would be about 50-50. I talk to many people who hate the prefixes and refuse to enable them. So, why should it be forced on them?