The only thing TuxServe doesn't do that I need is the ability to use a firewall workaround (like SysReset's) to allow for DCC sends / chats to work. I know X-Chat doesn't support /dccserver (although there are unofficial patches) but there must be some way of doing it... (curiously, mIRC running under wine can use it without any problems).
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I was actually thinking about this last week. As you mentioned, XChat itself doesn't support it, but in theory I could add it into TuxServe itself. I think the only reason it's not in XChat is because it's not an "official" standard - if it was in the RFCs I'm sure they'd add it.
The problem is the question "would it be worth it?" - not that many people really need this feature, and for those who do want it could just use the XChat patches. You could also argue that that's too much trouble (as a lot of people these days don't compile things and just get binaries - via thinks like like apt-get, etc) or that it's only needed for TuxServe, not normal XChat usage.
I have looked into /dccserver compatability before, but it seems to be pretty much undocumented. Saying that, it's not hard to find out how it works: like DCC, but in reverse.
Okay... I accept the challenge :) I'll look into to. BUT, if it will interfere with XChat too much, is too "hacky", or just too hard to do - then I won't bother. It would be a cool feature to have :)
If anyone has any ideas, code, or help on this subject, feel free to join in :)
Aypok...
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I was just thinking about this a few mins after my last post and realised something: With this feature on, only people using mIRC and patched versions of XChat will be able to access your /dccserver based fserve. Admittedly, most leechers/downloaders will be using mIRC anyway - but it will make your fserve unusable to normal XChat users, like me, and leave us cursing under our breath :)
On the flip side, some people may not be able to serve at all without this... So I guess it'd be better to add it in, than ignore it.
Okay... I just realised that this post offers no useful information... Meh, I'll post it anyway incase I forget - then I can read it back and go "Oh yeah - I did think that" :) Anyhoo, back to working out how to make it work...
Aypok...
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Well actually it doesn't seem to be such a big deal anymore. Because in XChat 2.4.0 there's an option to "Get address from IRC Server" for your DCC Sends/Chats. With this enabled (and the appropriate port forwarding on one's router/firewall), DCC connections can operate normally.
TuxServe is an amazing script. So keep up the good work! :)
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Glad you got it fixed :) I had to do the same thing to get DCC to work, too.
I'm still playing around with the idea of a dccserve mode for TuxServe (I'm sure some people would want it), but it's a while away from implimentation - there are more important things to deal with first :)
Aypok...
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The only thing TuxServe doesn't do that I need is the ability to use a firewall workaround (like SysReset's) to allow for DCC sends / chats to work. I know X-Chat doesn't support /dccserver (although there are unofficial patches) but there must be some way of doing it... (curiously, mIRC running under wine can use it without any problems).
Hi,
I was actually thinking about this last week. As you mentioned, XChat itself doesn't support it, but in theory I could add it into TuxServe itself. I think the only reason it's not in XChat is because it's not an "official" standard - if it was in the RFCs I'm sure they'd add it.
The problem is the question "would it be worth it?" - not that many people really need this feature, and for those who do want it could just use the XChat patches. You could also argue that that's too much trouble (as a lot of people these days don't compile things and just get binaries - via thinks like like apt-get, etc) or that it's only needed for TuxServe, not normal XChat usage.
I have looked into /dccserver compatability before, but it seems to be pretty much undocumented. Saying that, it's not hard to find out how it works: like DCC, but in reverse.
Okay... I accept the challenge :) I'll look into to. BUT, if it will interfere with XChat too much, is too "hacky", or just too hard to do - then I won't bother. It would be a cool feature to have :)
If anyone has any ideas, code, or help on this subject, feel free to join in :)
Aypok...
Hi,
I was just thinking about this a few mins after my last post and realised something: With this feature on, only people using mIRC and patched versions of XChat will be able to access your /dccserver based fserve. Admittedly, most leechers/downloaders will be using mIRC anyway - but it will make your fserve unusable to normal XChat users, like me, and leave us cursing under our breath :)
On the flip side, some people may not be able to serve at all without this... So I guess it'd be better to add it in, than ignore it.
Okay... I just realised that this post offers no useful information... Meh, I'll post it anyway incase I forget - then I can read it back and go "Oh yeah - I did think that" :) Anyhoo, back to working out how to make it work...
Aypok...
Well actually it doesn't seem to be such a big deal anymore. Because in XChat 2.4.0 there's an option to "Get address from IRC Server" for your DCC Sends/Chats. With this enabled (and the appropriate port forwarding on one's router/firewall), DCC connections can operate normally.
TuxServe is an amazing script. So keep up the good work! :)
Hi,
Glad you got it fixed :) I had to do the same thing to get DCC to work, too.
I'm still playing around with the idea of a dccserve mode for TuxServe (I'm sure some people would want it), but it's a while away from implimentation - there are more important things to deal with first :)
Aypok...