My client does keeps track internaly of the channel's ban list. The
bug has been here for years :P~
Test on an ircu2.10.10.pl15
*** Server Caen.Fr.Eu.UnderNet.org runs version u2.10.10.pl15.
B90eEFfIKlMopsStW
/mode #mbutest +bb *!*@1.2.3.* *!*@1.2.*
*** Mode change "-b *!*@1.2.3.*" on #mbutest by mbuna
*** Mode change "+bb *!*@1.2.3.* *!*@1.2.*" on #mbutest by mbuna
<internal channel ban list fucked>
Test on an ircu2.10.11.beta
*** Server hub7.eu.bugged.org runs version u2.10.11.beta.00. B27DeEFfHIKMpS
/mode #betatest +bb *!*@1.2.3.* *!*@1.2.*
*** Mode change "+b *!*@1.2.*" on #betatest by mbu
/mode #betatest +b *@*
*** Mode change "-b+b *!*@1.2.* *!*@*" on #betatest by mbu
<everything alright>
The feature nighty talked about is still available, and it's even
better as noone in the channel will detect a ban on *@* explicitely:
/mode #betatest +bb test@1 test@2
*** Mode change "+bb *!test@1 *!test@2" on #betatest by mbu
/mode #betatest +b-b *@* *@*
*** Mode change "-bb *!test@2 *!test@1" on #betatest by mbu
As you can see someone fixed it <g>, thank you!
-- mbuna
>It appears that so far very few people have taken the time to understand
>what it is Hidden is reporting. When I look at the log he sent along, I
>see him issuing one set of four bans. The mode messages that get sent
>out, however, are two sets, the first of 3 bans, all removed, and the
>second of 4 bans, all added--and the order is incorrect. If you mentally
>process the bans as he shows, you end up with 4 bans on the channel when
>in fact there is only one--the last one in his sequence. (You also see
>bans removed that weren't present in the first place.)
>
>What he has reported is in fact a bug--ircu should not behave in this
>fashion. There's a slim chance that it is a bug in his client, but I
>would place the probability of that being the case at about 5-10%--no
>client I know of keeps track of the channel's ban list.
>
>My original question stands: What server version displays this behavior?
>--
>Kevin L. Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
