Page 1 of 2

Services and Bots

Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 10:57 am
by Spreegem
What services do you suggest using with Unreal IRCD?
Also what bot would you suggest using with Unreal IRCD?

Thank You in advance.

Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 1:51 pm
by AngryWolf
For the first question:
What question is answered in the topic Announcement: Recommended Services? :)

Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:02 pm
by aquanight
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 :P .

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

Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2004 6:37 pm
by Spreegem
Thank You both!

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:42 pm
by null
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. :(

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2004 11:44 pm
by jewles
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

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 4:04 am
by codemastr
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.

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 7:01 am
by w00t
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.

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 4:39 pm
by null
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.

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 4:59 pm
by codemastr
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.

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 11:20 pm
by null
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.

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 11:45 pm
by codemastr
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.

Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2004 1:59 am
by aquanight
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.

Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2004 2:23 am
by null
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. :P
It shouldn't have been a changeable option in the first place....

Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2004 4:26 pm
by codemastr
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?