[Coder-Com] adding multi-accept

2002-05-15 Thread Sascha Schumann
Hi, have you considered adding the multi-accept capability to the server? This would significantly elevate the performance in the case of a restarting server where thousands of connections arrive in a short time interval. The lack of multi-accept became apparent when

RE: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Brian A. Cline
> > The P-word. > Which is? -- Brian A. Cline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re[2]: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Chris Crowther
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Alexander Maassen wrote: > Well, why are those opers still present on the network then and don't > get removed from the ircd.conf ? :) The P-word. > Best regards, > Alexandermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Chris "_Shad0w_" Crowther [EMAIL

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Kev
> >Nope, global channels, primarily. These lines would be put in place > >only by vote of undernet-admins, just like U-lines. > > Hm, not really necessary - it is up to each admin to decide what his opers > cannot do, if an admin doesn't want his opers to touch #hottub he can stick > it in a Q

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread reed
Kev, I'll be glad to do the docs for the new features! :) ~reed R33D33R@UnderNet R33D33R@GenericNet R33D33R@QuakeNet UnderNet Spelling/Grammar Checker UnderNet Coder Committee Odd Guy UnderNet DMSetup Member/Helper/BotAdmin GenericNet Network Administrator cyclebot Project Administrator

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread mr.volta
An other idea: why not setting a channelmode that prevents the use of /opmode and /clearmode, that can only be set by U:lined services ... _ Get email for your site ---> http://www.everyone.net _

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Arjen Wolfs
At 18:40 15-5-2002, Kev wrote: > > Kev, I'm not sure, but shouldn't this be limited to local channels > > only ? Otherwise you could get fights between admins and servers, and > > I doubt you folks would want that. > >Nope, global channels, primarily. These lines would be put in place >only by vo

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Kev
> Kev, I'm not sure, but shouldn't this be limited to local channels > only ? Otherwise you could get fights between admins and servers, and > I doubt you folks would want that. Nope, global channels, primarily. These lines would be put in place only by vote of undernet-admins, just like U-lines

Re[2]: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Alexander Maassen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Hello Chris, Wednesday, May 15, 2002, 6:06:13 PM, you wrote: CC> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Alexander Maassen wrote: >> My other question regarding this is: Why would you want to limit >> opmode's in certain channels ? CC> There are channels on U

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Chris Crowther
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Alexander Maassen wrote: > My other question regarding this is: Why would you want to limit > opmode's in certain channels ? There are channels on Undernet which a lot of people (including myself) would rather no-one did anything with. Unfortunatly some opers can't

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Alex Badea
begin quote from Kev on May 15, 2002: > The u2.10.11 server (still in beta--we have a crash in s_conf.c somewhere) > allows an operator to use /opmode and /clearmode to manipulate modes on a > channel. Admins may wish to restrict operators from manipulating modes on > certain channels. Thus, I'

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Stacy Brown
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Alexander Maassen wrote: > Kev, I'm not sure, but shouldn't this be limited to local channels > only ? Otherwise you could get fights between admins and servers, and > I doubt you folks would want that. > > My other question regarding this is: Why would you want to limit > op

Re: [Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Alexander Maassen
Hello Kev, Wednesday, May 15, 2002, 4:36:57 PM, you wrote: K> The u2.10.11 server (still in beta--we have a crash in s_conf.c somewhere) K> allows an operator to use /opmode and /clearmode to manipulate modes on a K> channel. Admins may wish to restrict operators from manipulating modes on K> c

[Coder-Com] Call for Volunteers: Feature addition

2002-05-15 Thread Kev
The u2.10.11 server (still in beta--we have a crash in s_conf.c somewhere) allows an operator to use /opmode and /clearmode to manipulate modes on a channel. Admins may wish to restrict operators from manipulating modes on certain channels. Thus, I'm looking for a volunteer to implement a new fe

Re: [Coder-Com] GNUworld fails to compile under OpenBSD/sparc 3.0

2002-05-15 Thread nighty
At 08:57 15/05/2002, you wrote: >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Hash: SHA1 > >This is the result of trying to compile the lastest version of >GNUworld from CVS on an OpenBSD/sparc system. > >Any ideas as to a solution to this problem? Hello, have you tried using "gmake" as specified in the

[Coder-Com] GNUworld fails to compile under OpenBSD/sparc 3.0

2002-05-15 Thread devnull
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 This is the result of trying to compile the lastest version of GNUworld from CVS on an OpenBSD/sparc system. Any ideas as to a solution to this problem? $ gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/sparc-unknown-openbsd3.0/2.95.3/specs gcc version 2