On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 12:46, Perry Lorier wrote: > Ian Kumlien wrote: > > > > >>Thank you for your report, however, in future can you send bug reports > >>to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'll get onto fixing this ASAP. > > > >on ircu universal you get "can't part, not on that channel" so, moving > >the "user has parted" up somewhere in the code + adding a check if it's > >missing should be all thats required. > > > >I dunno what changes there has been since universal forked (i assume > >it's s**tloads) but checking other commands for similar mishaps might be > >a good idea. > > > It's part of the cleanup we did to the JOIN/PART code, mostly so we can > keep one line of JOIN/PART's instead of splitting them into separate > JOIN/PART messages to send server to server. We build up a list of > JOIN/PART's in a "joinbuf" then flush the join buf to servers. Due to > fixing another bug (referencing a channel after it had been free'd) we > introduced this one. I've fixed this in the latest beta which we're > trialling at the moment to make sure it doesn't core anything :)
Yeah, i thought i had subscribed to the "patches" ml but apparently i wasn't but i am now, so this time i'll know if there is a patch out or now. > >PS. I'm new to this ml... So.. I'm the arcnet ircd coder, and were > >planning to move from universal to undernet.. Thats why I'm getting a > >bit paranoid =) > Heh, bad timing for a nasty bug eh? :) You'll probably find we've made > a LOT of changes over "universal", mostly code cleanups, restructuring > how things are done so they are easier to code on (at least IMHO). Yes, but that also makes our patch harder to migrate, but i have been meaning to move soon. There are some problems with services that needs replacing etc that slows it down, which in this case seems to have been good =). We're a really small network, but we seem to have had several ircnet 'lamers' trying to take channels (kinda fun to see them fight with ircu restrictions on this scale though). I'm also thinking of adding more patches to our set, and I'll port em to basic ircu if i do so that you can include em if you want to. Anyways, I got a mail from Kevin Mitchell earlier today about this, and i replied (off ml, since his reply was off ml) that support for linux poll mechanisms would be fun to see, like signal poll and epoll. There are libraries out there that handles this already, and the license allows code borrowing so it shouldn't be that hard for someone who knows the code to either write a if for the lib or use the code in the lib. The examples i mailed was: http://www.monkey.org/~provos/libevent/ http://liboop.org/ (I mean, Kqueue is great, but not all servers run *bsd (netbsd has kqueue now, so that should make it *)) -- Ian Kumlien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
