AllProtection.tcl (Stable: v4.8 / Beta: v4.9b4)

[IRCNick]

I can't understand you ? What do you mine exactly ? The settings are incorrect ? Isn't this the number that have to be added to the current count(users) ?

[Sir_Fz]

Yes, if you set it as I told you. (make sure your bot is not lagged, and if you think it's too fast then decrease the check time.)

[IRCNick]

I maded this from the begining with:

Code: Select all

.chanset #channel ap:limit 10

But not there is the problem. I think the timer is bugged ... or i dont know exactly. Do you have tested it on a big channel with more dynamic changes?
Hmm i try to set the timer to check every 90 sec instead of 60 sec ... but I think that not the checktime is the problem
Greet

[Sir_Fz]

The limit procedure has not been changed since the first time it was put in the script, I and alot of other users used it with no bug what so ever, I watched it working fine on my and others' bots. Just a note, if clim(ctype) is set to 1 then the timer is in minutes, not seconds. I don't recommend using seconds since that much speed is not needed.

[demond]

I'd advise against timer use in the automatic limiter - channel join/leave activity is not tied to time but to channel events

+l adjustment should be done in event binds

(haven't looked at the code so ignore this if no timer is used)

[Sir_Fz]

It does use timers or utimers (depends on setting), but some channels have alot of users joining consecutively, do setting limits on timers is better IMO since it won't cause the bot to set a limit everytime someone joins, quits or parts...etc

[demond]

no no, you must not adjust +l on any chanevent, no doubt about that; you simply keep a "slack" between +l and current user count - say your +l is 100 and your user count is 85; if your slack is 10 and 6 users join in a bunch, that will trigger increasing +l with 10 to 110 - since the difference between user count and +l has become less than the slack (85+6=91 < 100-10=90)

it's a matter of simple calculations in join/part/kick/quit handlers (in my case, I have a common +l handler bound to all of those) and adjusting +l only if the slack is too low

[Sir_Fz]

That's a great idea demond, definitely better than timers. I've already eliminated all timers in the new version and used your [unixtime] following instead I'll implement the limit thing in the next release which isn't soon since I'm not online alot these days.

[sjones]

Hi Sir_Fz,
I've been using your script for about a month now, just wanna say it's great - has everything I need.

I do have one question though, several people in a channel monitored by this script come from the same host, and if all of these people talk at once, the text flood / public msg flood kicks in and kicks them all ( i have bantype set to 1 which is ident@host ). Is there anyway I can get the bot to monitor for ident@host for floods instead of just host, which is what it seems to be doing now?

Any help is much appreciated. Thanks!

[De Kus]

are you sure that is the behavior of this script? I quick checked the code and found what I had suggested to him: spam logging of $uhost which is ident@host.com.

PS: whats that?

Code: Select all

proc ap:cf str {
 set str [stripcodes bcruag $str]
}

if you wanted to store $str outside of the proc you are missing some code and if wanted to use the return of set x y, you could have ommited. however using return looks more... clean .

[sjones]

are you sure that is the behavior of this script? I quick checked the code and found what I had suggested to him: spam logging of $uhost which is ident@host.com.

I'm positive, I have tested it multiple times. I have 2 users on the same host with different idents, the flood-chan is set to 8:10, I got one of them to type 7 times, and the other to type once, and the user that typed once got kicked for flooding.

[Sir_Fz]

The script triggers on offences from $uhost which is ident@host and not just host. Also flood-chan has nothing to do with AllProtection, if you're using version 4.3 then it's the textl(punish) setting, if you're using the latest 4.4b20 then it's the ap:textl chansetting.

De Kus, yeah that's meant as a return. If it makes you feel better I'll change it

[Sir_Fz]

Finally, AllProtection4.5 is finished. I'm not gonna write any change log, check the history in the header of the script.

This is a public release, which means it's supposed to be bugless

Basicly, all AllProtection users should update to this version; many many changes has been done to the script.

[minted]

sweet
love the new abilily to .chanset everything
takes alot more configuring that other versions, but worth it
thanks

small feature request
the ability to add bad words/nicks via the .chanset in dcc chat, so everything can be done through the partyline.

i can't seem to get the codes kick working, not sure if i have set it up wrong, heres what i have

## 7 ## Control codes.
#

# Use .chanset #channel ap:codes r:<n> b:<n> u:<n> c:<n> (in DCC)
# Example: If you set ap:codes to: r:35 b:35 u:35 c:35
# Then 35 (or more) characters affected by Reverse or Bold or Underline or Color
# will be considered an offence.
# Set default rate here:
lappend ap:udefs {ap:codes "r:1 b:1 u:250 c:300"}

# Control codes punishment method:
set codesf(pmeth) 5

# Control codes ban type.
set codesf(btype) 2

# control codes ban time in minutes. (0 for no ban time)
set codesf(btime) 2

# Control codes kick msg.
set codesf(kmsg) "Excess codes detected. 2 min tempban"

i also .chanset * ap:codes r:1 b:1 u:250 c:300 and tested it in various channels, with various ppl trying it. i dont get any errors on the partyline.
am i doing anything wrong? or could my bot be ignoring codes?
thanks in advance

[Sir_Fz]

Setting badwords via .chanset wouldn't be very efficient since the current eggdrop version cuts channel settings with long words. As for the codes not working, it's working fine on my bot but I'll check with other users and see if it's working.