Internal community chat

ady · Post by **ady** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:35 pm

the ones who get errors like path not found etc, try by installing armagetron in that pc first, and then select 2.8 or 0.0 correctly.
first thing that both apps do is open user.cfg or user_3_0.cfg for input, no file=error

Luke-Jr · Post by **Luke-Jr** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:53 pm

ady wrote:the ones who get errors like path not found etc, try by installing armagetron in that pc first, and then select 2.8 or 0.0 correctly.
first thing that both apps do is open user.cfg or user_3_0.cfg for input, no file=error

Yay, spyware!

BTW, we have never released a 0.0, nor will 2.8 be released probably for some years... ;p

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:19 pm

It isn't spyware just because it reads the configuration. IIRC, it does that to determine the player's name. To qualify as spyware, it would need to scan the configuration for instant chats containing /login and to send them to Ady. Of course, without the source, we can't see whether it does that.

ady · Post by **ady** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:31 pm

/me smells paranoia

wrtlprnft · Post by **wrtlprnft** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:49 pm

Always gotta be paranoid. None of us knows you, nor can we check whether you included any spyware features. And you aren't a bigger, open group, either, from which we can expect information leaks should there be some secret unwanted features.

Sorry, it's good to have a healthy bit of paranoia.

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:28 pm

Yep. And it's our duty here to inform others about possible dangers so that everyone can choose his own personal level of paranoia. We did so with Armabell, we do the same with Armachatron. Don't misinterpret that as hostility, Ady. Why don't you answer some of the questions here?

Let me talk straight how I feel about Armachatron right now. I know:
1. It's written in a language that is next to impossible to port to non-Windows

I don't know:
2. The protocol it's using
3. WTF it is doing since I don't have the source
4. How it's going to be useful if you have to run a Windows server to create a chatroom
5. Whether I or anyone else on a non-Windows OS is ever going to be able to communicate with Armachatron users

So you see, I only know bad things and am completely uninformed about the rest. The effect of 1. is that, without someone investing real work which can only begin once 2. or 3. are eliminated, this application splits the community into people who can use Armachatron and those who can't. According to our download stats, it's about a 50-50 split. Understand that if this split is permanent, meaning that there is no hope ever of getting your app to interoperate with Unix/OSX, we'll have to actively fight the spreading of it, which means removing all links to it from the forum and wiki. We don't want the community to be split.
Now, should we see a chance to make this interoperate (2. or 3. need to be fixed for that) and be useful to everyone who wants to have a chatroom (that's 4. to be addressed in one way or the other), we can tolerate Armachatron. Meaning we let you promote it all you want here and on the Wiki, although we'll probably put up those concerns we have left next to your promotion. We can then see whether it catches a userbase among the Windows users.
Then, should Armachatron gets popular, we can seriously think about interoperability. As stated, the probably easiest way would be to let the chatroom server communicate with an IRC channel. But note that unless we don't see this happy end for everyone as a possibility, and we can't unless we see the source or protocol specs, hepling Armachatron spread is not in our interest.

The most important question right now is: when will we see the sourcecode? I may even dig out my old VisualStudio 6 copy and see if VB is included in the disks that I have left.

ady · Post by **ady** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:01 pm

winsock to irc ....
and the server can be run on a normal pc running windows...

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:18 pm

ady wrote:and the server can be run on a normal pc running windows...

Problem there is that the game servers mostly run on Unix, and we want it that way. We can give better support for Unix game servers. Heck, I don't even know how to run a dedicated server as a service under Windows. So there are two possible consequences of the fact the Chatron server only runs on Windows, should it get adopted: One is that the clan admins run two machines, one with Unix and one with Windows, 24 hours a day consuming twice the power. The other is that they also run the gameserver on Windows. I like neither.

And sorry to turn this into a ceterum censeo, but what about the source?

Post by **Tank Program** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:49 pm

Also, you probably don't have to publicly release the source, you could just give it to armagetron developers...

Luke-Jr · Post by **Luke-Jr** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:51 pm

protocol is some kind of streaming Rich Text Format on port 999

Edit:
that's for PM stuff
the groupchat is port 600 and looks like this:
[Joined]NAME
[NEW NAME LIST]
[People]-000000001@dmin
[People]0000000003LoDAÐ¥-Lµ¢îfer
[People]0000000001Luke
[Message]<NAME>: MSG
[Line]00000009600000001905000000097500000019050000000000
[Line]00000009750000001905000000103500000019200000000000
[Disconnected]0000000003

wrtlprnft · Post by **wrtlprnft** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 7:52 am

You know that port 999 is a well- known port and shouldn't be used in custom apps?
Great, now you even have to run the server with root rights to be able to open port 999!

pavelo · Post by **pavelo** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:08 pm

wrtlprnft wrote:You know that port 999 is a well- known port and shouldn't be used in custom apps?
Great, now you even have to run the server with root rights to be able to open port 999!

I think windows(tm) doesn't have the <1024 port restriction....

haven't tried it though..... i dont think i ever used windows as normal user, since well.......... all you can do as a normal user is play minesweeper...

Luke-Jr · Post by **Luke-Jr** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:18 am

pavelo wrote:
wrtlprnft wrote:You know that port 999 is a well- known port and shouldn't be used in custom apps?
Great, now you even have to run the server with root rights to be able to open port 999!
I think windows(tm) doesn't have the <1024 port restriction....
haven't tried it though..... i dont think i ever used windows as normal user, since well.......... all you can do as a normal user is play minesweeper...

That's yet another security hole in windows. There's a reason for the <1024 port restriction.
BTW, in case you haven't noticed, Windows isn't a server platform.

pavelo · Post by **pavelo** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 10:55 pm

Luke-Jr wrote: BTW, in case you haven't noticed, Windows isn't a server platform.

well now............... no one siad it was.....
as for the port thing, one could argue that it allows you to run say www or anon ftp server with user rights...........
but that wasn't the point..... i just wanted to say something cause you were all like ganging up on the poor guy......
guess now i'll be the victim for a while