| 01:34.32 | *** join/#maemo-ssu sixwheeledbeast (~paul@host-78-144-100-179.as13285.net) |
| 01:47.40 | *** join/#maemo-ssu MohammadAG (~MohammadA@Maemo/community/contributor/MohammadAG) |
| 01:53.53 | *** join/#maemo-ssu Milhouse (~Milhouse@Maemo/community/contributor/Milhouse) |
| 02:28.46 | Maxdamantus | Just wondering .. what's the difference between zImage-2.6.28.10-cssu1 and zImage-2.6.28.10-cssu1.fiasco? |
| 02:32.27 | Maxdamantus | There seems to be some metadata at the beginning of the .fiasco, but flasher doesn't unpack it with -u |
| 02:33.26 | Maxdamantus | Oh, nvm .. was using the flasher wrong. |
| 02:37.12 | Maxdamantus | also answers the question I asked in #maemo the other day of what "FIASCO" means .. I think the people there thought I was asking about etymology, but I just wanted to know that it referred to essentially an archive format (and not a software distribution or something). |
| 03:01.34 | *** join/#maemo-ssu g3kk3r (torrkull@lehtori.cc.tut.fi) |
| 03:04.48 | *** join/#maemo-ssu amizraa (~amizraa@gateway/tor-sasl/amizraa) |
| 03:08.15 | *** join/#maemo-ssu silviof (~silviof@unaffiliated/silviof) |
| 03:27.00 | *** join/#maemo-ssu sixwheeledbeast (~paul@host-92-28-73-86.as13285.net) |
| 03:29.00 | *** join/#maemo-ssu amiconn_ (quassel@rockbox/developer/amiconn) |
| 04:23.39 | *** join/#maemo-ssu kostola (~quassel@antani.ispirata.biz) |
| 04:43.22 | *** join/#maemo-ssu unclouded (~neil@2001:4428:200:80fc:7e05:7ff:fe0d:d421) |
| 06:44.50 | *** join/#maemo-ssu sunny_s (~sunny_s@business-092-079-020-027.static.arcor-ip.net) |
| 06:50.10 | *** join/#maemo-ssu Maxdamantus (~Maxdamant@2001:470:f078::dead:beef:cafe) |
| 07:18.47 | *** join/#maemo-ssu thedead1440 (~thedead14@unaffiliated/thedead1440) |
| 07:26.11 | *** join/#maemo-ssu Maxdamantus (~Maxdamant@2001:470:f078::dead:beef:cafe) |
| 07:49.55 | DocScrutinizer05 | (i386 packages of cssu) would that change anything after all? I mean, does xephyr have orientation support? and how? would MHD shortcuts really work on xephyr? Anything else difference you could notice UX wise? |
| 07:51.03 | DocScrutinizer05 | xephyr stuff is meant to test *apps* during development, no? |
| 07:51.28 | DocScrutinizer05 | we got no CSSU-only apps (well, not really) |
| 07:52.17 | DocScrutinizer05 | and that's fine the way it is, and expected to stay this way |
| 07:54.37 | DocScrutinizer05 | finally tests rollback of wlancond, after err 2(?) years of IRC not reconnecting after connection roaming |
| 07:54.56 | silviof | DocScrutinizer05: Its a matter of test of software. I use my maemo-based mobile on daily basis. If I develop some components than I will test it. But without a second phone I have only the xephyr-way. But the xephyr way is only functional on X86. |
| 07:55.21 | DocScrutinizer05 | so? |
| 07:55.27 | silviof | so! |
| 07:55.31 | DocScrutinizer05 | how's that related to cssu? |
| 07:56.33 | DocScrutinizer05 | you can't test cssu "components" on x86 |
| 07:56.41 | DocScrutinizer05 | generally |
| 07:56.54 | DocScrutinizer05 | and any app isn't supposed to need cssu to run |
| 07:57.44 | silviof | no you cant, because if you change something in hildon-desktop you need to build a package and to install with dpkg. Thats is not able because some depencies are not provided for the x86. |
| 07:57.54 | DocScrutinizer05 | so, depending on what "components" you want to develop, you're either fine with x86 emu as is, or can't use it at all |
| 07:59.52 | DocScrutinizer05 | and not because there's no cssu x86 available, but because x86 isn't the right thing to use for some components to test |
| 08:03.28 | DocScrutinizer05 | IroN900:~# ll /usr/sbin/wlancond* |
| 08:03.30 | DocScrutinizer05 | -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 59764 2012-08-22 19:53 /usr/sbin/wlancond |
| 08:03.31 | DocScrutinizer05 | -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 57692 2011-12-24 17:38 /usr/sbin/wlancond.bak |
| 08:03.33 | DocScrutinizer05 | MHM! |
| 08:05.42 | DocScrutinizer05 | IroN900:~# mv /usr/sbin/wlancond /usr/sbin/wlancond.new |
| 08:05.43 | DocScrutinizer05 | IroN900:~# cp /usr/sbin/wlancond.bak /usr/sbin/wlancond |
| 08:05.45 | DocScrutinizer05 | IroN900:~# uptime |
| 08:05.46 | DocScrutinizer05 | <PROTECTED> |
| 08:05.48 | DocScrutinizer05 | IroN900:~# dsmetool -b |
| 08:07.42 | DocScrutinizer05 | let's see if that will fix this annoying obscure incapability of xchat to detect a change of own IP -> connection stall -> reconnect_to_server |
| 08:19.03 | *** join/#maemo-ssu MohammadAG_ (~MohammadA@Maemo/community/contributor/MohammadAG) |
| 08:21.25 | *** join/#maemo-ssu sixwheeledbeast (~paul@host-2-97-92-123.as13285.net) |
| 08:23.53 | DocScrutinizer05 | merlin1991: http://mg.pov.lt/maemo-ssu-irclog/%23maemo-ssu.2011-12-26.log.html#t2011-12-26T22:46:07 |
| 08:24.27 | DocScrutinizer05 | merlin1991: what's been the purpose of patched wlancond? I can't find "wlancond" string in cssu-t changelog |
| 08:38.52 | *** join/#maemo-ssu freemangordon_ (~ivo@printec.bg) |
| 09:20.21 | merlin1991 | the package name is osso-wlan, it contains 1 fix for the injeciton driver that has no side effects and a fix for eapd |
| 09:21.37 | merlin1991 | commits: https://gitorious.org/community-ssu/osso-wlan/commit/d33e64330937dd1812bed257a4525513ebaf8fe1 and https://gitorious.org/community-ssu/osso-wlan/commit/22c5e804febd00195dc48dae652b120a3e289369 |
| 09:22.45 | *** join/#maemo-ssu jon_y (~enforcer@2001:e68:4053:2e8f:e01f:8e6d:cdca:d0e5) |
| 09:24.56 | merlin1991 | DocScrutinizer05: ^^ |
| 09:27.59 | DocScrutinizer05 | thanks |
| 09:28.17 | DocScrutinizer05 | what's eapd? |
| 09:29.23 | merlin1991 | its part of the wpa auth stuff |
| 09:29.33 | DocScrutinizer05 | aah |
| 09:30.22 | DocScrutinizer05 | I'm finally fed up with xchat taking 60min to reconnect to ZNC when I leave WLAN range and roam to GPRS |
| 09:30.51 | DocScrutinizer05 | checking all possible culprits now, but I can't find anything that makes sense |
| 09:33.08 | merlin1991 | there's always the chance that xchat is the culprit ;) |
| 09:45.38 | DocScrutinizer05 | yeah, but I can't recall it changed since it worked, which it evidently did |
| 09:45.59 | DocScrutinizer05 | only change I can think of: update to ZNC1.0 |
| 09:47.32 | DocScrutinizer05 | might ZNC ping-keep-alive not be aware of IP changes? |
| 09:48.03 | DocScrutinizer05 | which would mean it answers pings from arbitrary source IP |
| 09:48.28 | DocScrutinizer05 | no matter if a client authenticated there or not |
| 09:50.14 | DocScrutinizer05 | and even if that was the case, then where from are the 3600 seconds from IP change on N900 till xchat re-registering with ZNC |
| 09:51.40 | DocScrutinizer05 | or maybe xchat doesn't accept "net_ping_timeout = 90" and defaults to 3600? |
| 09:52.52 | *** join/#maemo-ssu freemangordon_ (~ivo@printec.bg) |
| 09:58.59 | DocScrutinizer05 | merlin1991: do you have the xchat code at hand? could you check if xchat rejects "net_ping_timeout = 90" and defaults to 3600? |
| 09:59.36 | DocScrutinizer05 | it seems I might have changed the net_ping_timeout from 240 to 90 eventually |
| 10:10.22 | *** join/#maemo-ssu arcean (~arcean@aaep128.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl) |
| 10:14.11 | DocScrutinizer51 | let's see what happens now when roaming to GPRS |
| 10:15.01 | DocScrutinizer05 | ok |
| 10:15.21 | DocScrutinizer05 | starts a timer in mind |
| 10:17.08 | *** join/#maemo-ssu jon_y (~enforcer@2001:e68:4053:15f9:e01f:8e6d:cdca:d0e5) |
| 10:17.36 | *** join/#maemo-ssu sunny_s (~sunny_s@business-092-079-020-027.static.arcor-ip.net) |
| 10:22.23 | DocScrutinizer05 | ok, the 301 seconds I've sent net_ping_timeout to have expired. No reconnect of xchat >:-( |
| 10:23.15 | DocScrutinizer05 | changing wlancond didn't help |
| 10:23.38 | DocScrutinizer05 | changing all suspicious settings in ZNC didn't help |
| 10:44.19 | DocScrutinizer05 | hmm, relogin after 25 min |
| 10:45.08 | *** join/#maemo-ssu luf (~luf@80.188.29.62) |
| 11:02.16 | *** join/#maemo-ssu joshgillies (~josh@ppp108-14.static.internode.on.net) |
| 11:10.25 | DocScrutinizer51 | hmmm |
| 11:10.40 | DocScrutinizer51 | *something* changed |
| 11:11.02 | DocScrutinizer51 | it now does relogin after 25min |
| 11:11.30 | DocScrutinizer05 | with "net_ping_timeout = 301" |
| 11:11.57 | DocScrutinizer05 | strace of xchat looks strange |
| 11:12.52 | DocScrutinizer05 | anyway no packets sent between ZNC and xchat for the whole duration of disconnect => xchat is buggy, or fremantle system is buggy |
| 11:28.41 | *** join/#maemo-ssu lizardo (lizardo@nat/indt/x-jorcdsrzdnfsdqru) |
| 11:38.34 | *** join/#maemo-ssu NishanthMenon (~nmenon@nat/ti/x-myiadimugvhtbhba) |
| 11:54.13 | *** join/#maemo-ssu sixwheeledbeast (~paul@host-2-98-100-159.as13285.net) |
| 11:57.48 | *** join/#maemo-ssu javispedro (~javier@Maemo/community/contributor/javispedro) |
| 12:15.35 | *** join/#maemo-ssu dhbiker (~dhbiker@95.87.145.172) |
| 12:53.21 | *** join/#maemo-ssu hbib (~user@tmo-098-6.customers.d1-online.com) |
| 13:08.27 | *** join/#maemo-ssu hbib (~user@tmo-108-92.customers.d1-online.com) |
| 13:19.31 | *** join/#maemo-ssu hbib1 (~user@tmo-098-162.customers.d1-online.com) |
| 13:22.31 | *** join/#maemo-ssu M4rtinK (~M4rtinK@2001:718:801:22e:a11:96ff:fe16:10e4) |
| 14:16.27 | FIQ | DocScrutinizer05: for me, xchat is usually having a hard time to figure out that it disconnected if that's what you're referring to |
| 14:16.34 | FIQ | not just on N900, but on desktop as well |
| 14:17.37 | DocScrutinizer05 | well, th<t been different for me, a maybe 1 or 2 years ago. eventually it changed to xchat needing exactly 60min after IP change to reconnect |
| 14:18.00 | DocScrutinizer05 | and now it seems my tweaks changed that 25min |
| 14:19.22 | DocScrutinizer05 | the only things i changed on N900 were: "net_ping_timeout = 90" -> "net_ping_timeout = 301" (SIC!), and replacing CSSU wlancond by a two years old orginal version |
| 14:19.59 | DocScrutinizer05 | I can't see any logic in either of both changing time to reconnect form 60 to 25min |
| 14:22.36 | DocScrutinizer05 | I nevertheless wonder if maybe ZNC is somehow remote-controlling what xchat does, regarding timeouts and whatnot |
| 14:28.13 | DocScrutinizer05 | if that wasn't 25 but 18min 8possible, since I only tested 2 times and not very precisely) then this would suggest timeout is 5400min / net_ping_timeout |
| 14:28.42 | DocScrutinizer05 | s/timeout/time till reconnect/ |
| 14:32.42 | DocScrutinizer05 | I wonder if IRC protocol does something similar like SIP, for keepalive timeout negotiation. I.E. both the server (here ZNC) and the client (xchat) negotiate the timeout based on some prefrences set on either side. In the end this would mean xchat actually gets "remote controlled" by ZNC like I suspected above |
| 14:34.11 | *** join/#maemo-ssu NIN101 (~core@n900.quitesimple.org) |
| 14:34.26 | DocScrutinizer05 | particularly: when ZNC tells xchat "hey, I gonna send a keepalive ping to you every 60 min" then it's of course clear why xchat won't notice the IP change resp "disconnect" any sooner |
| 14:36.53 | DocScrutinizer05 | maybe xchat asks for 90 seconds interval, and ZNC answers 60 but some bug multiplies that by 60 to convert from seconds to minutes (or simply places wrong unit in there) |
| 14:38.51 | DocScrutinizer05 | anyway, you can easily adjust xchat net_ping_timeout: /set net_ping_timeout <value in seconds> |
| 14:39.13 | DocScrutinizer05 | just in case you want to experiment a bit with this |
| 14:40.51 | DocScrutinizer05 | note that the new value doesn't get saved to .xchat2/xchat.conf until you gracefully exit xchat (or find the "save" menu entry) |
| 14:42.20 | DocScrutinizer05 | now if only I'd find a more easy method than changing the IP of N900, to test this |
| 15:05.08 | *** join/#maemo-ssu Vazay (1fd2b0a2@gateway/web/freenode/ip.31.210.176.162) |
| 15:15.12 | *** join/#maemo-ssu FIQ (~FIQ@fiq.se) |
| 15:35.47 | *** join/#maemo-ssu arcean_ (~arcean@aacx252.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl) |
| 15:57.31 | *** join/#maemo-ssu anYc (anyc@home.hadiko.uni-karlsruhe.de) |
| 16:04.07 | *** join/#maemo-ssu Guest53546 (~FIQ@unaffiliated/fiq) |
| 16:06.43 | FIQ | DocScrutinizer05: do you know how the irc protocol looks like? |
| 16:07.20 | FIQ | the only thing the server sends continuosly is a ping timeout check |
| 16:08.11 | FIQ | the server doesn't tell the client to do anything regarding connectivity (besides these pingpongs) |
| 16:09.02 | FIQ | the server *does* "remote control" irc clients, but only by issuing IRC commands to it, i.e. to set chanmodes/usermodes, join/part channels, change your nick and host, etc |
| 16:09.45 | FIQ | and since there's a bajillion different irc servers and there's not really a strict standard, the client has to obey to be able to function properly everywhere |
| 16:09.50 | *** join/#maemo-ssu joshgillies (~josh@ppp108-14.static.internode.on.net) |
| 16:10.04 | DocScrutinizer05 | FIQ: does >>I wonder if IRC protocol does something similar like SIP<< sound like I know IRC protocol? |
| 16:10.11 | FIQ | no it doesn't |
| 16:10.16 | FIQ | that's why I told a bit :D |
| 16:10.29 | FIQ | i.e. the fact that the server doesn't tell the client anything regarding timeouts |
| 16:11.49 | DocScrutinizer05 | aha |
| 16:16.14 | DocScrutinizer05 | tbh i'm not particularly interested in IRC protocol. What i'd like to know are details about how xchat handles net_ping_timeout |
| 16:17.46 | DocScrutinizer05 | I'd even think that keep-alive-pings are only loosely related to IRC protocol, if at all |
| 16:18.20 | kerio | the IRC protocol doesn't deal with it i think |
| 16:18.34 | kerio | i mean, there's no specified timeout |
| 16:18.44 | DocScrutinizer05 | at least xchat has it under net_*, not under irc_* |
| 16:24.50 | *** join/#maemo-ssu hbib (~wurmel@pD9E3DDF7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) |
| 16:42.42 | *** join/#maemo-ssu hbib (~wurmel@pD9E3DDF7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) |
| 16:55.06 | *** join/#maemo-ssu dos1 (~dos@81.219.200.186) |
| 16:55.09 | *** join/#maemo-ssu dos1 (~dos@unaffiliated/dos1) |
| 16:59.53 | ShadowJK | The irc server independently decides how often to send pings towards clien (if any)t, the client independently decides how often to send pings towards server, if any. |
| 17:00.39 | ShadowJK | xchat in maemo was patched to remove most timers, so all pinging is disabled by default. |
| 17:01.34 | DocScrutinizer05 | DAMN! who decided THAT to be a good idea? |
| 17:02.20 | ShadowJK | Because it ate humongous amounts of power before that change |
| 17:02.31 | DocScrutinizer05 | I can't see any reasonable rationale behind that |
| 17:02.48 | ShadowJK | There were about half a dozen 1s timers, iirc |
| 17:03.03 | DocScrutinizer05 | it still spins in a poll() = timeout loop with ~2s loop time |
| 17:03.35 | ShadowJK | net_ping_timeout is probably not even meant to send periodical pings |
| 17:03.56 | DocScrutinizer05 | I don't care if it sends pings |
| 17:04.29 | DocScrutinizer05 | it however shall notice missing inbound pings from server, or otherwise detect that server lost connection |
| 17:04.49 | DocScrutinizer05 | this worked a year or max 2 years ago, nof it's fubar |
| 17:04.57 | DocScrutinizer05 | now* |
| 17:05.46 | DocScrutinizer05 | whoever decided to implement that patch err botch for sure didn't do a clever thing |
| 17:05.53 | ShadowJK | xchat doesn't know how often the server intends to send pings, or if it will send pings at all. |
| 17:06.13 | ShadowJK | That it ever worked on your network was probably a coincidence or accident :P |
| 17:06.34 | DocScrutinizer05 | well, that's why I thought it sends pings itself, and period should be the net_ping_timeout |
| 17:06.58 | DocScrutinizer05 | no, definitely no coincidence |
| 17:07.12 | DocScrutinizer05 | I carefully tuned it to work like it should |
| 17:07.20 | ShadowJK | Amusingly, googling turns up people on hexchat with same "issue" |
| 17:07.42 | *** join/#maemo-ssu FredrIQ (~FIQ@fiq.se) |
| 17:08.14 | *** join/#maemo-ssu okias (~okias@berger.cust.centro-net.cz) |
| 17:08.32 | DocScrutinizer05 | and xchat never "ate battery like mad" om my device, see bq27200 logs on wiki power |
| 17:09.00 | ShadowJK | We didn't have bq27200 access whenever xchat was ported |
| 17:09.16 | DocScrutinizer05 | irrelevant |
| 17:09.43 | DocScrutinizer05 | I had a working xchat and I metered it with bq27200.sh |
| 17:09.49 | ShadowJK | xchat hasn't been modified since 2009 or so anyways :P |
| 17:10.18 | DocScrutinizer05 | then your whole story about removed timers is moot |
| 17:10.51 | DocScrutinizer05 | since I told that my xchat worked a 2 years ago |
| 17:11.26 | ShadowJK | Yeah that stuff was all done in Maemo4 and Maemo5 2009 until powertop showed saner number of wakeups |
| 17:11.43 | ShadowJK | I dont think xchat has been touched since |
| 17:13.32 | *** join/#maemo-ssu FredrIQ (~FIQ@unaffiliated/fiq) |
| 17:19.12 | ShadowJK | xchat on PC behaves the same, I just tried set net_ping_timeout to 10, and nothing is sent |
| 17:19.26 | *** join/#maemo-ssu FIQ (~FIQ@prgmr/customer/fiq) |
| 17:21.07 | *** join/#maemo-ssu BCMM (~BCMM@unaffiliated/bcmm) |
| 17:22.41 | ShadowJK | ugh, actually, it causes reoccurring disconnects, since no ping is sent, no pings can be received, it is now is on a 10s reconnect cycle |
| 17:22.45 | ShadowJK | lol |
| 17:23.17 | *** join/#maemo-ssu LauRoman (~LauRoman@5-14-92-17.residential.rdsnet.ro) |
| 17:23.22 | DocScrutinizer05 | most weird stuff: the only things i changed on N900 were: "net_ping_timeout = 90" -> "net_ping_timeout = 301" (SIC!), and replacing CSSU wlancond by a two years old orginal version. which made xchat re-register after ~25min instead of 60min |
| 17:25.21 | DocScrutinizer05 | I should try /set net_ping_timeout 600 and see if it reconnects after 5 minutes then |
| 17:25.22 | ShadowJK | Turning on gui_lagometer makes it send stuff every 10s or so on PC |
| 17:25.32 | ShadowJK | I use /timer -repeat 0 600 allserv ping |
| 17:25.35 | ShadowJK | on N900, to send a ping every 10 minutes |
| 17:25.44 | DocScrutinizer05 | oooooh! lag-o-meter!! |
| 17:25.51 | DocScrutinizer05 | I think I disabled that |
| 17:26.02 | DocScrutinizer05 | DANG! |
| 17:26.39 | DocScrutinizer05 | (/timer) niiiice! |
| 17:27.27 | DocScrutinizer05 | but... does it notice when ping fails? and does it reconnect then? |
| 17:28.33 | DocScrutinizer05 | lemme find where's that goddamn lagometer option |
| 17:28.35 | ShadowJK | It would take 5 minutes for tcp to timeout, or if the other end is actually alive, it would probably send a RST and it'd fail immediately |
| 17:28.42 | ShadowJK | /set gui_lagometer |
| 17:29.04 | DocScrutinizer05 | didn't use that, I'm sure |
| 17:30.07 | DocScrutinizer05 | erheehee#@!!$% line 54: gui_lagometer = 0 |
| 17:30.30 | DocScrutinizer05 | but I guess I used settings |
| 17:33.19 | DocScrutinizer51 | ok |
| 17:34.36 | DocScrutinizer05 | so, I just 2roamed" wlan->gprs |
| 17:45.51 | DocScrutinizer51 | 1836 recdonnected |
| 17:46.36 | DocScrutinizer05 | so it took 3 minutes when lagometer = 1 |
| 17:46.53 | DocScrutinizer05 | miracle solved |
| 17:47.19 | DocScrutinizer05 | problem spotted - now how to eliminate it? |
| 17:49.23 | DocScrutinizer05 | seems net_ping_timeout just sets a threshold for lagometer, eh? |
| 17:49.41 | DocScrutinizer05 | no lagometer, no threshold, no timeout, no reconnect |
| 17:51.07 | *** join/#maemo-ssu amizraa (~amizraa@gateway/tor-sasl/amizraa) |
| 17:51.09 | DocScrutinizer05 | what we actually would want is a config parameter for ping interval of lagometer, while lagometer=1|0 SHALL only be a GUI thing |
| 17:51.44 | DocScrutinizer05 | ShadowJK: thanks a megaton! |
| 17:55.21 | *** join/#maemo-ssu sixwheeledbeast (~paul@cl-1547.lon-02.gb.sixxs.net) |
| 17:58.43 | ShadowJK | I wonder if net_ping_timeout also works on pings sent with /timer |
| 17:59.20 | DocScrutinizer05 | that's what I asked |
| 17:59.36 | DocScrutinizer05 | [2014-02-11 18:27:27] <DocScrutinizer05> but... does it notice when ping fails? and does it reconnect then? |
| 19:25.21 | *** join/#maemo-ssu NishanthMenon (~nmenon@nat/ti/x-zjinypnxicvqshxy) |
| 19:30.43 | *** join/#maemo-ssu Guest21837 (~FIQ@fiq.se) |
| 19:46.43 | *** join/#maemo-ssu FredrIQ (~FIQ@fiq.se) |
| 19:50.13 | *** join/#maemo-ssu FIQ- (~FIQ@fiq.se) |
| 21:12.59 | *** join/#maemo-ssu honestly (~luke@unaffiliated/luketheduke) |
| 21:20.14 | *** join/#maemo-ssu okias (~okias@berger.cust.centro-net.cz) |
| 22:17.53 | *** join/#maemo-ssu M4rtinK (~M4rtinK@ip-78-102-146-9.net.upcbroadband.cz) |
| 22:28.48 | *** join/#maemo-ssu FIQ- (~FIQ@prgmr/customer/fiq) |
| 23:09.40 | *** join/#maemo-ssu Gagliano (959ad3aa@gateway/web/freenode/ip.149.154.211.170) |
| 23:09.42 | Gagliano | http://ip.gagliano.fr Free call over the world, free service finance by ads. No registration required, please help me to grow !!! Thank you all of you ! |
| 23:09.44 | Gagliano | http://ip.gagliano.fr/ = Appel gratuit dans le monde, financé par les pubs, merci de cliquez sur les pubs si vous êtes satisfait du service. Merciiiiii de m'aider à améliorer mon service egalement. |
| 23:09.50 | Gagliano | Merci thank you ! ;-) |
| 23:19.36 | *** join/#maemo-ssu xes (~xes@unaffiliated/xes) |
| 23:25.56 | *** part/#maemo-ssu Gagliano (959ad3aa@gateway/web/freenode/ip.149.154.211.170) |
| 23:31.58 | Maxdamantus | 05:16:14 < DocScrutinizer05> tbh i'm not particularly interested in IRC protocol. What i'd like to know are details about how xchat handles net_ping_timeout |
| 23:32.09 | Maxdamantus | Dunno if it's been answered, but XChat sends pings itself to the server. |
| 23:32.20 | Maxdamantus | iirc, fairly frequently, when the lag-meter is enabled. |
| 23:32.29 | Maxdamantus | I think it avoids sending them when it's disabled. |
| 23:33.29 | Maxdamantus | I think you can open a raw log tab in XChat. |
| 23:33.35 | Maxdamantus | maybe with the /rawlog command .. /me checks. |
| 23:34.08 | Maxdamantus | Window → Raw log |
| 23:34.51 | Maxdamantus | eh, looks like that was already said. |
| 23:35.02 | Maxdamantus | (the ping thing) |
| 23:36.06 | *** join/#maemo-ssu nox- (noident@freebsd/developer/nox) |