| 00:00.13 | tensai | did you try rml's preempt patch and/or andrew morton's low latency patch? |
| 00:01.31 | hans | yeah, I have that |
| 00:02.07 | hans | I even ran it as root so it could set the high scheduling priority |
| 00:02.12 | hans | no use |
| 00:02.19 | tensai | how bad is bad? |
| 00:02.29 | hans | when I pipe it to the keyboard (hardware) it's fine so it's not alsa's fault |
| 00:02.43 | hans | not really bad, but noticeable. hearing is one of the least tolerant things though |
| 00:03.13 | hans | the odd thing isswitch (rtype->getType()) |
| 00:03.43 | hans | wow. where did that come from? |
| 00:04.02 | hans | the odd thing is that timidity queues up anyway, so it's not playing realtime strictly. I think it just takes too long between polls and the result is jitter when there's lots of dat |
| 00:04.05 | hans | a |
| 00:05.16 | *** join/#utah Derek_ (~dmdavis@byu074928wks.rn.byu.edu) |
| 00:14.00 | Jayce^ | hans, listening to that manhattan clique mix of solsbury hill, I'm noticing some riffs from other songs too. ever hear the single 'vitamin C'? has a bit from there too |
| 00:19.02 | *** join/#utah hA1cy0n (~etah@12-254-254-124.client.attbi.com) |
| 00:21.31 | hans | no, haven't heard that one |
| 00:23.13 | Jayce^ | pretty fun track |
| 00:24.17 | Jayce^ | I know I have at least one mix of it on my server |
| 00:37.38 | *** join/#utah tensai (~tensai@dsl.dyn.01-86.budget.net) |
| 01:54.21 | *** part/#utah hA1cy0n (~etah@12-254-254-124.client.attbi.com) |
| 01:58.14 | *** join/#utah Bradipo_ (bradipo@sicilia.bradipo.org) |
| 02:40.39 | *** join/#utah ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) |
| 02:40.39 | *** join/#utah Bradipo_ (bradipo@sicilia.bradipo.org) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 02:40.39 | *** join/#utah Mecworks (marc@208.186.182.174) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 02:40.39 | *** join/#utah Bradipo (~andyb@piedra.caldera.com) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 02:40.39 | *** mode/#Utah [+o ChanServ] by asimov.freenode.net |
| 02:42.28 | *** join/#utah ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) |
| 02:42.28 | *** join/#utah Bradipo_ (bradipo@sicilia.bradipo.org) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 02:42.28 | *** join/#utah Bradipo (~andyb@piedra.caldera.com) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 02:42.28 | *** join/#utah Mecworks (marc@208.186.182.174) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 02:42.28 | *** mode/#Utah [+o ChanServ] by asimov.freenode.net |
| 02:43.50 | Bradipo_ | Ok, cut it out guys. |
| 02:44.11 | Jayce^ | having fun folks? |
| 02:44.24 | Bradipo_ | Oh yeah. |
| 02:44.42 | Bradipo_ | Just trying to download the OpenBSD 3.3. song. |
| 02:44.50 | Jayce^ | the song?? |
| 02:45.16 | Bradipo_ | Yeah, each release comes with a song. |
| 02:45.25 | Bradipo_ | And MP3, but this time it looks like they also offer an OGG. |
| 02:45.34 | Bradipo_ | I can't believe that OGG is so much smaller in size. |
| 02:46.24 | Bradipo_ | http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html |
| 02:46.34 | brailsmt | i can't beleive .wav compression hasn't caught on... ;) |
| 02:46.39 | Bradipo_ | Heh. |
| 02:47.02 | brailsmt | it is a lossless algorithm too... |
| 02:47.34 | Jayce^ | flac baby |
| 02:47.47 | Bradipo_ | Is it? |
| 02:47.57 | Bradipo_ | That is truly amazing then. |
| 02:50.30 | brailsmt | Bradipo_: too bad it is only 1:1 compression ratio... |
| 02:50.35 | brailsmt | :) |
| 02:50.44 | Bradipo_ | Oh, you mean .wav |
| 02:50.53 | Bradipo_ | I thought you meant that OGG was lossless. |
| 02:50.54 | brailsmt | yeah... |
| 02:51.03 | brailsmt | april fools + 13 |
| 02:51.10 | brailsmt | :) |
| 02:51.26 | Jayce^ | like I said, try flac.. |
| 02:51.41 | Jayce^ | get's about 50% compression, and is still lossless |
| 02:51.47 | Jayce^ | and completely open.. |
| 02:55.02 | Bradipo_ | 50% is still pretty big though. |
| 02:55.30 | Jayce^ | yeah, but if you are trying to preserve an original quality, it's better that 1:1 |
| 02:55.41 | Bradipo_ | True. |
| 02:59.58 | *** join/#utah hans (~fugalh@128.187.251.39) |
| 03:00.02 | Bradipo_ | That's quite the song. |
| 03:00.12 | hans | ? |
| 03:00.46 | Bradipo_ | It's even funnier if you have been following the recent events with OpenBSD. :-) |
| 03:27.34 | brailsmt | anyone here in cs345? (too bad, i already know the answer is no...) |
| 03:31.26 | hans | took it once |
| 03:31.35 | Bradipo_ | Anyone here ever use freenet? |
| 03:32.56 | brailsmt | not i |
| 03:35.43 | *** join/#utah kryptik (kryptik@208.187.113.111) |
| 03:50.41 | hans | what is freenet? |
| 03:50.44 | hans | sounds familiar |
| 04:01.24 | *** join/#utah Jayce^ (~jayce@65.204.214.20) |
| 04:03.21 | hans | anyone know how to make AIM forget buddies? I just pruned my buddy list only to have AIM repopulate it |
| 04:03.39 | Jayce^ | using what program? |
| 04:03.46 | hans | vim |
| 04:03.47 | hans | :) |
| 04:03.51 | hans | ~/.gaim/blist.xml |
| 04:04.25 | hans | but I wouldn't mind if I had to do it through the windows aim client even - just so I know to do it next time it's convenient |
| 04:04.30 | Jayce^ | that doesn't actually remove it from the server, where it's stored.. |
| 04:04.47 | Jayce^ | gaim should do it correctly if you have .60 |
| 04:05.29 | hans | hm. well maybe it will. I had a "Buddies" and a "buddies" and I think gaim was royally confused. hopefully renaming one will make gaim behave better |
| 04:20.05 | *** join/#utah neybar (~jalance@user-112ugs7.biz.mindspring.com) |
| 04:35.02 | brailsmt | can anyone else get to news.byu.edu |
| 04:35.03 | brailsmt | ? |
| 04:35.35 | Jayce^ | yeah |
| 04:35.56 | hans | yup. sends me to the byu homepage |
| 04:36.22 | kryptik | Heh.. |
| 04:36.24 | brailsmt | i try slrn, or knode and neither can access it |
| 04:36.30 | kryptik | Why did I just do that? |
| 04:36.51 | brailsmt | and then from route y, when i click on the discussion groups link, it just loads forever... |
| 04:37.55 | brailsmt | the only time I have ever needed to go to byus newsgroups, and i can't... |
| 04:43.16 | hans | oh that news.byu.edu :) |
| 04:43.26 | hans | seems to be down |
| 04:44.06 | brailsmt | yeah, frustrating... here i have procastinated this project and now one of my resources is not available... :( |
| 04:44.18 | brailsmt | *sigh* |
| 04:44.48 | brailsmt | not really procastinated for the sake of procastinating, rather, putting it off until other more important and pressing things were done first... |
| 04:49.27 | hans | getopt is pretty slick, as far as C things go |
| 04:57.46 | hans | i've been writing my first serious straight-C program. |
| 04:58.04 | hans | it's a challenge to think so linearly. ;) |
| 04:58.46 | Bradipo_ | http://www.bonsaiprimer.com/ if you're interested in growing your own. :-) |
| 05:04.59 | hans | well, that link helped me grow my own mozilla core |
| 05:05.16 | Bradipo_ | Anyone else just get a big power surge? |
| 05:05.20 | hans | yah |
| 05:05.33 | Bradipo_ | Thank goodness for UPSes. :-) |
| 05:05.39 | hans | yup :) |
| 05:48.21 | *** join/#utah Jayce^ (~jayce@65.204.214.20) |
| 06:23.25 | *** join/#utah kryptik (kryptik@208.187.113.114) |
| 07:35.46 | *** join/#utah synapse (~synapse@208.187.113.39) |
| 08:02.13 | *** part/#utah milo` (~synapse@208.187.113.39) |
| 10:41.38 | *** join/#utah ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) |
| 10:41.38 | *** join/#utah Jayce^ (~jayce@65.204.214.20) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 10:41.38 | *** join/#utah Mecworks (marc@208.186.182.174) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 10:41.38 | *** join/#utah Bradipo (~andyb@piedra.caldera.com) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 10:41.38 | *** mode/#Utah [+o ChanServ] by asimov.freenode.net |
| 13:38.16 | *** join/#utah hans (~fugalh@128.187.251.39) |
| 15:40.54 | Bradipo | Anyone know how to do symbolic calculus on an HP 48? |
| 15:42.12 | levi | I used to. :) |
| 15:43.02 | levi | You should be able to enter stuff in via the equation editor, and then select stuff to do to it out of a menu somewhere. |
| 15:45.26 | *** join/#utah kryptik (kryptik@208.187.113.108) |
| 16:20.17 | *** join/#utah kryptik` (kryptik@208.187.113.30) |
| 16:48.51 | *** join/#utah tensai (~tensai@dsl.dyn.01-86.budget.net) |
| 17:23.51 | *** join/#utah hans (~fugalh@128.187.251.39) |
| 18:11.50 | *** join/#utah Jayce^ (~jayce@65.204.214.20) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 18:12.59 | *** join/#utah tensai (~tensai@dsl.dyn.01-86.budget.net) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 18:18.34 | *** join/#utah tensai_ (~tensai@dsl.dyn.01-86.budget.net) |
| 22:25.20 | *** join/#utah kryptik (~synapse@208.187.113.40) |
| 22:26.55 | kryptik | ksirc kinda sucks |
| 22:30.54 | *** join/#utah hans (~fugalh@128.187.251.39) |
| 22:32.19 | levi | kryptic: xchat all the way, dude. ;) |
| 22:32.26 | hans | i don't know wade personally, but I could swear he's been around for at least 2 or three [insert-your-favorite-precious-space-consuming-stuff-in-here-so-people-that-use-inbox-for-everything-are-happy] discussions |
| 22:33.11 | hans | he seems to be taking some posts to heart, and seems surprised that anyone thinks it's a big deal |
| 22:33.21 | levi | huh? Is this in reference to some mail list stuff? |
| 22:34.47 | hans | plug |
| 22:34.59 | levi | Oh. I was never on that one. |
| 22:35.43 | hans | really? I like plug more than uug usually. more tame and terse |
| 22:36.01 | hans | although I yawn (and don't even read) when the database debates come around |
| 22:43.03 | levi | Heh. I'm not on uug anymore, either. :) |
| 22:44.12 | levi | I'm on a couple of lists I never read at work, and a list for hot-rodding Miatas on my home account. That's about it. |
| 22:44.16 | levi | Though sometimes spam seems like a separate mail list. |
| 22:48.33 | Bradipo | I'm on about 10 mailing lists and not one of them uses [insert-your-favorite-precious-space-consuming-stuff-in-here-so-people-that-use-inbox-for-everything-are-happy] |
| 22:54.52 | levi | On the miata ones, folks use a special code in the subject when they start to drift off-topic. |
| 22:55.20 | levi | But it's three letters, so it's not a big deal. |
| 22:55.30 | hans | too bad april fools is over. I could change UUG to get rid of it and see if anyone notices - and if they do I just say april fools. <sigh> |
| 22:58.38 | kryptik | Heh. |
| 22:58.53 | levi | You should just write a mail filter that removes the [stuff] from the subject line before filing them. |
| 23:00.33 | Bradipo | Those who can't figure out how to filter, should learn. :-) |
| 23:00.35 | hans | i might do that. time to revamp the email filters as soon as finals are over anyway |
| 23:00.57 | hans | it's not really enough of an annoyance to bother though. It's just a matter of principle |
| 23:01.06 | Bradipo | True. |
| 23:01.29 | hans | if we modify the mailing list just to make it easy for newbies to filter, we're not really doing much to help the newbies get the hang of 'it' |
| 23:01.30 | Bradipo | The only things that go into my inbox are new emails for which I don't yet have a filter. :-) |
| 23:02.54 | hans | i've been doing mine all bayesian for about 6 months now |
| 23:03.49 | hans | unfortunately the program I use doesn't deal with headers intelligently so it doesn't have as good accuracy as I'd like (although I may note it does excellent against spam) |
| 23:04.17 | Bradipo | What's that, bmf? |
| 23:04.22 | hans | ifile |
| 23:04.26 | Bradipo | Oh. |
| 23:04.40 | hans | haven't heard of bmf. does it do multiple mailboxes? |
| 23:04.41 | Bradipo | So, you have it trained to filter your mail into folders? |
| 23:04.53 | Bradipo | Well, bmf is just another filter. |
| 23:05.02 | hans | yeah. and by and large it does exceptionally well |
| 23:05.21 | hans | but ocassionaly email I'd like to come to my inbox goes to my plug or uug folder (because it's from someone on the list) |
| 23:05.30 | Bradipo | It can either reject the message or do a pass-through while writing a header to indicate it's spamicity. |
| 23:05.55 | Bradipo | I don't have that problem because I filter based on a unique identifier for each list. |
| 23:06.11 | Bradipo | And bmf is only used to flag a message as spam or not. |
| 23:06.25 | Bradipo | I then use another filter to actually file them into folders. |
| 23:08.12 | hans | yeah. the bayesian thing has pros and cons. pros are you don't have to maintain procmail or maildrop recipes. If a message ends up in the wrong place just refile it and the filter learns for next time. cons are it's less accurate (or too accurate depending on your perspective) |
| 23:09.23 | hans | another pro is to be able to say your mail is filtered by AI :) |
| 23:09.36 | Bradipo | Heh, yeah. |
| 23:09.55 | Bradipo | bmf is a bayesian filter though, it just trains for ham/spam, but doesn't file. |
| 23:10.36 | Bradipo | I wish I could implement a bayesian filter that would learn which IP addresses are bad and reject them during the SMTP dialog. :-) |
| 23:10.51 | Bradipo | Something integrated into the SMTP daemon... |
| 23:11.17 | Bradipo | That way, if enough words flag it as spam it will be rejected entirely, and not simply bounced. |
| 23:11.31 | hans | i wanna look into something that integrates at least with the MTA so it just bounces spam |
| 23:11.38 | Bradipo | Right. |
| 23:11.48 | hans | as if it were non-deliverable address |
| 23:11.52 | Bradipo | That's what I'm saying here. :-) |
| 23:13.29 | Bradipo | It probably wouldn't be too hard to implement. |
| 23:13.29 | Bradipo | The hardest part would be in the training... |
| 23:13.30 | Bradipo | How do you retrain an email that you can't receive? |
| 23:14.04 | levi | Unless you're making an ip blacklist from your marked-as-spam mails, you won't gain any benefit from doing it in the MTA. You have to receive the body of the message to analyze it, so you still spend the bandwidth. |
| 23:14.26 | Bradipo | Unless you provide an out-of-band method to deliver it. |
| 23:14.38 | Bradipo | i.e. you are blocked, but if this is wrong, please enter the text via this URL. |
| 23:15.25 | levi | Yeah, but to get any benefit you have to block via ip, not via baysian analysis of the message. |
| 23:15.43 | levi | Because if you have the message to analyze, you've already spent the bandwidth. |
| 23:16.10 | Bradipo | And have the URL be cryptographically generated so they can't just flood you with emails to break your training. |
| 23:16.10 | Bradipo | Not necessarily. |
| 23:16.10 | Bradipo | You can block the email after the DATA command has finished. |
| 23:16.33 | Bradipo | Right, but the message won't go anywhere. |
| 23:16.38 | Bradipo | And it is ineffective for the purpose of spamming. |
| 23:16.44 | Bradipo | The point of spamming is not to use your bandwidth. |
| 23:16.54 | levi | There's no point in doing it in the MTA, though. |
| 23:17.02 | hans | Bradipo: that sounds good. I was thinking another way is to train it personally - i.e. I train it with a corpus |
| 23:17.23 | Bradipo | Yeah, but I find that my corpus of email may not match yours. |
| 23:17.43 | hans | each user could have his own corpus |
| 23:17.46 | Bradipo | But there will certainly be many similarities. |
| 23:17.59 | Bradipo | That would truly be difficult to setup... |
| 23:18.19 | hans | not really. just a dot-file in the home directory |
| 23:18.47 | levi | This all sounds cool, just don't put it in a MTA. |
| 23:19.18 | hans | levi, i don't know much about SMTP and how spammers operate, but wouldn't it be beneficial to have the MTA reject it? Then spammers would know (rather, their programs would know) that it's not deliverable |
| 23:19.35 | Bradipo | It would be to some extent. |
| 23:19.42 | hans | and that no human ever saw it and no matter how many times they send it a human won't see it |
| 23:19.45 | levi | From logs I've seen, they don't give a crap if the MTA rejects it. |
| 23:19.50 | levi | They'll send it again. |
| 23:19.53 | Bradipo | Most spammer outfits use fake sender addresses and if you accept the mail, there is no way to bounce it back to them. |
| 23:20.04 | kryptik | Anyone know how * if possible * I could send the contents of a file to a specific channel in ksirc? |
| 23:20.12 | kryptik | Dont want a bot.. |
| 23:20.18 | Bradipo | But if you reject it before hand, at least someone will probably find out about it (i.e. the open relay administrator). |
| 23:20.43 | Bradipo | Not to a channel. |
| 23:20.46 | hans | yup, and you won't have to deal with the bounced bounce |
| 23:20.48 | Bradipo | DCC will work for individuals I believe. |
| 23:20.51 | Bradipo | Exactly. |
| 23:20.52 | levi | They'll be finding out about it anyway if they check their logs. Other addresses will bounce due to their low rate of good addresses. |
| 23:21.09 | kryptik | Bradipo: Will you explain that to me in a PM |
| 23:21.20 | Bradipo | Just read up on DCC |
| 23:21.24 | Bradipo | DCC chat |
| 23:21.37 | kryptik | I know what DCC is. |
| 23:21.44 | Bradipo | And DCC send. |
| 23:21.51 | kryptik | I now what both are |
| 23:21.54 | kryptik | and how to use them |
| 23:22.17 | Bradipo | Oh, then what is your question? |
| 23:22.35 | Bradipo | Most open relay administrators won't ever check their logs. |
| 23:22.47 | Bradipo | The only way they would ever find out is if their mail server crashed because it was full of bounces. |
| 23:22.59 | Bradipo | If they checked their logs, they might realize they have a problem. |
| 23:23.16 | levi | Yes, but a few people running smtpds that bounce spam will not make much difference. |
| 23:23.34 | levi | Because a LOT of the harvested emails will bounce anyway. |
| 23:24.04 | Bradipo | Right, but if they are accepted first, then the bounce will be delivered to nobody that can do anything about it. |
| 23:24.16 | hans | i'm more pragmatic. if I don't see it and the spammer (whether he cares or not) gets it back in his face, I'm happy |
| 23:24.35 | hans | whether or not it makes a difference in the big picture. :) |
| 23:24.41 | Bradipo | I sure wouldn't mind a new mail protocol like IM2000. |
| 23:24.48 | levi | hans: The spammer likely won't get it back in his face whatever you do, most likely. |
| 23:24.55 | Bradipo | Nope, unfortunately. |
| 23:25.19 | *** join/#utah kryptik (~synapse@208.187.113.40) |
| 23:25.22 | Bradipo | But, maybe the open relay will get shutdown or noticed if enough of the mail ends up undeliverable on his machine instead of mine. |
| 23:25.37 | levi | By putting it in the smtp daemon, you're needlessly complicating a program that's sitting with an open port on the internet. |
| 23:25.43 | levi | Not a wise thing, IMHO. |
| 23:26.03 | Bradipo | Not wise if you're running as root. :-) |
| 23:26.25 | Bradipo | It doesn't even have to be the real smtpd. |
| 23:26.28 | hans | good point |
| 23:26.31 | Bradipo | It can be something like the spamd in OpenBSD. |
| 23:26.48 | Bradipo | spamd is just a small SMTP daemon specifically meant to thwart spammers. |
| 23:26.57 | Bradipo | But it is invoked only if there is a redirect rule in the firewall. |
| 23:27.26 | Bradipo | But that uses RBL style matching of IP addresses anyway. |
| 23:27.30 | levi | How are redirect rules in the firewall relevant to bayesian filtering of spam? |
| 23:27.35 | Bradipo | So it may not be as helpful in this discussion. |
| 23:28.15 | Bradipo | Well, I can think of at least one way... |
| 23:28.57 | Bradipo | How much spam do you all see in a day? |
| 23:29.00 | levi | If you use your bayesian filter to come up with an ip list, you still lose out on some bayesian benefits. |
| 23:29.08 | Bradipo | Yep. |
| 23:29.20 | Bradipo | I don't think it would be effective as just an IP publisher. |
| 23:29.20 | levi | I don't see a whole lot, really. |
| 23:29.23 | hans | definitely. bayesian wouldn't even be worth it for just ips |
| 23:29.31 | Bradipo | It needs to be able to scan the entire message to be useful. |
| 23:29.48 | Bradipo | Until we started blocking a lot of spam here, we were getting easy over 10,000 per day. |
| 23:29.50 | hans | about 10 so far today |
| 23:30.18 | hans | some days more, some less. not a lot really |
| 23:30.24 | Bradipo | That's more than legitimate email. |
| 23:30.25 | levi | Bradipo: I imagine a lot of those were blocked emails retrying to get through. |
| 23:30.32 | Bradipo | No. |
| 23:30.36 | Bradipo | I'm talking individual messages. |
| 23:30.43 | hans | that depends. does UUG or PLUG count as legitimate email? :) |
| 23:30.51 | Bradipo | Heh. |
| 23:31.10 | Bradipo | I have found, however, that spammers no longer respect mail servers. |
| 23:31.14 | hans | my fetchmail went down for a day once and I checked it on the server for fun |
| 23:31.21 | Bradipo | If I use a 45x error to indicate a temporary failure, they immediately retry. |
| 23:31.34 | hans | somewhere around 100 messages between all the lists, over about 8 hours |
| 23:31.44 | Bradipo | Thus resulting in a DoS from that server until blocked. |
| 23:32.04 | Bradipo | They use non-friendly retry schedules on delivering deferred emails. |
| 23:32.18 | Bradipo | So, I have since had to simply block it outright with a 5xx error message. |
| 23:32.48 | Bradipo | Hard to read that way eh? |
| 23:32.56 | hans | yeah |
| 23:33.13 | Bradipo | filters are definitely nice things. |
| 23:33.19 | hans | real life is much more boring though. I get maybe .6 personal emails a day :) |
| 23:33.36 | Bradipo | I get maybe one or two at most. |
| 23:34.10 | Bradipo | The problem really shouldn't be about blocking. |
| 23:34.22 | Bradipo | The more you block, the less useful email becomes. |
| 23:34.30 | Bradipo | But unfortunately, there are no better alternatives. |
| 23:34.53 | Bradipo | spammers get away with it because they don't have to incur the cost of the delivery. |
| 23:36.12 | Bradipo | I probably wouldn't have such a big problem with spam if it was done responsibly (i.e. using addresses to which bounces could be delivered) |
| 23:36.51 | Bradipo | One of my favorite methods for blocking spam is using DJB's location codes in DNS. |
| 23:37.21 | Bradipo | Basically, if I receive spam, I blacklist their DNS servers (not their mail server) and the next time they try to lookup my MX it returns 127.0.0.1 |
| 23:37.38 | hans | heh. that's fun |
| 23:37.48 | Bradipo | So, they would try to deliver the mail to themselves. |
| 23:39.13 | Bradipo | kryptik: Did you figure out what you were trying to do? |
| 23:39.42 | kryptik | No, but I got it done a different way.. |
| 23:40.18 | kryptik | What I was looking for, was a way to *from the prompt* send the contents of a file to my IRC client.. |
| 23:40.35 | hans | cut & paste |
| 23:40.40 | hans | AKA flooding |
| 23:40.49 | hans | most people on irc don't like it |
| 23:40.50 | kryptik | something like: cat file.cpp > IRC |
| 23:40.54 | kryptik | I know what ti is |
| 23:41.01 | kryptik | And its ok if I do it |
| 23:41.14 | hans | it all depends on your client |
| 23:41.34 | hans | I'm sure some clients do let you run shell commands and redirect output to irc |
| 23:41.42 | hans | never tried though |
| 23:41.50 | Bradipo | It wouldn't be difficult to write a plugin to do this either. |
| 23:42.02 | kryptik | No.. I had one in perl. |
| 23:42.05 | Bradipo | At least for xchat. |
| 23:42.16 | kryptik | I wouldnt know... |
| 23:42.17 | Bradipo | Hopefully the file isn't more than a few lines long. :-) |
| 23:42.19 | kryptik | I used mirc. |
| 23:42.35 | kryptik | what is the command to start xchat? |
| 23:42.48 | Bradipo | xchat |
| 23:42.49 | hans | personally when I have to do that sort of thing I just open vim, type ggVG and then middle click |
| 23:42.51 | kryptik | Aight.. I dont have it installed. |
| 23:43.12 | Bradipo | That's one way to do it. |
| 23:43.26 | hans | anyone up for a game of xscorch? |
| 23:43.27 | Bradipo | kryptik: install it, it's much better than the other X irc clients. |
| 23:43.41 | Bradipo | Sweet, I would if I didn't have to go study for a final... |
| 23:43.56 | kryptik | Bradipo: Why do you say that.. |
| 23:44.20 | hans | maybe later. time for me to relax - been pushing the envelope to get these projects done. and my tv don't work. :) |
| 23:46.28 | Bradipo | I have just found that xchat is the nicest to use. |
| 23:46.36 | Bradipo | It might not be the prettiest since it is gtk based. |
| 23:46.43 | Bradipo | But it does have a lot of nice features. |
| 23:47.31 | kryptik | Nothing mirc doesnt have |
| 23:48.15 | Bradipo | True. |
| 23:48.19 | Bradipo | But mirc doens't run on X either. :-) |
| 23:48.27 | kryptik | WineX |
| 23:48.32 | Bradipo | Blech. |
| 23:48.38 | kryptik | Hey, it works... |
| 23:48.39 | Bradipo | lol |
| 23:48.42 | Bradipo | Yeah. |
| 23:49.10 | Bradipo | Wine is alright I guess, I just never like to go through the hassle of using it. :-) |
| 23:49.19 | kryptik | I have used xchat.. and I admit, I do like it more than any other client. (Besides mirc, that is.) |
| 23:49.26 | hans | wine is _slow_ |
| 23:49.47 | kryptik | Wine or winex? |
| 23:49.49 | kryptik | Or both? |
| 23:52.08 | hans | never used winex |
| 23:52.09 | hans | but wine is |
| 23:52.48 | kryptik | I dont know.. I use it with PS7 and it runs fine. |
| 23:53.13 | kryptik | Thats on a 2.6GHz and 1G of ram though |
| 23:58.04 | Bradipo | Heh. |
| 23:58.09 | Bradipo | That might make a difference. |
| 23:58.33 | hans | heh. java would probably even run fast on that. ;-) |