Metaphase

whooops. Sorry for the double post. It seems to be an inherrant problem. See posts here... http://forums.apexdc.net/index.php?showtopic=1259 and here... https://developer.berlios.de/bugs/?func=det...&group_id=1

Hey all. I am running Beta 2 and am still getting the crashes. Had this problem in 0.4.0 too. Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 16:18:26 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 1.0.0B2 (2007-04-10) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-04-11 15:16:38 TTH: CWLBR24QOCVAJHKKX2A6KQORSW4IRCWPJH36EYA ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection It goes on. Could this be down to a problem with hashing as it seems not to happen when I aint sharing anything.

Hey all. I am running Beta 2 and am still getting the crashes. Had this problem in 0.4.0 too. Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 16:18:26 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection <Removed dupes> It goes on. Could this be down to a problem with hashing as it seems not to happen when I aint sharing anything.

He has it setup exactly the same as mine and my one is running fine. Pretty much default settings. No checking being used. TCP/UDP/TLS all using same port. Seems to happen more when a user is trying to download 1 file from him in multiple hubs. But it also happens when thats not the case.

Hi. My friend is constantly getting the following errors. He can't seem to keep his client running longer than 5 mins. Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 16:18:26 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:53 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:56 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:56 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:57 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:57 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:58 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:59 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:59 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:59 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:25:59 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:26:00 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection Code: c0000005 (Access violation) Version: 0.4.0 (2006-12-24) Major: 5 Minor: 1 Build: 2600 SP: 2 Type: 1 Time: 2007-01-28 18:26:02 TTH: YBP45KNMY2PE64J2ZH7A77UJFMDBI4A4FN657VI ntdll!0x7C918FEA: RtlpWaitForCriticalSection ntdll!0x7C90104B: RtlEnterCriticalSection

Thanks for the info Greg. I will try it out.

lol, torture!! Looking great Crise! Now I would imagine what I am about to ask would cause some sort of headache. However, I will ask it anyway.... Is there a way you could include some sort of RegExp generator? Or is that just over the top?

I have had similar connection problems to this in the past. Probably since version 2.00 of SDC. What I now do in order to get round this problem is to have 3 different ports open. A unique one for TCP, UDP and TLS. Since running port forwarding like this I have had no problems. :S

/cc [22:07:14] *** Unknown command: cc /cs [22:07:21] *** Unknown command: cs [22:09:18] *** HELP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ /refresh (refersh share) /savequeue (save Download Queue) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ /search <string> (do a search...) /g <searchstring> (search Google) /imdb <imdbquery> (search film from IMDB database) /whois [iP] (do whois query for IP) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ /slots # (upload slots) /extraslots # (extra slots for small files) /smallfilesize # (max small file size) /ts (timestamps on/off) /connection (show IP and port where connected) /showjoins (enable/disable showing joins & parts in mainchat) /shutdown (activate shutdown sequence) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ /apexdc++ (print ApexDC++ version to chat) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ /away <msg> (enable/disable away mode) /winamp (Winamp spam to chat) /w (Winamp spam to chat) /clear,/c (clear chat) /ignorelist (show ignorelist in chat) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For more help please head to ApexDC++ Forums (Help -> Forums) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/sc integrated client command would be useful to start client checking. Would save having to edit hub properties, close hub and re-join in order to get checking started. :)

Thanks Crise. I will give it a try. Tazzie. Try this mate... $To: %[userNI] From: %[myNI] $<%[myNI]> You are being kicked because: %[userCT] %[userCS]|<%[myNI]> is kicking %[userNI] because: %[userCT] - %[userCS]|<%[myNI]> !kick %[userNI] %[userCT] %[userCS]| Also, here are a few different ones... $To: %[userNI] From: %[myNI] $<%[myNI]> You are being kicked because: %[userCS]|<%[myNI]> is kicking %[userNI] because: %[userCS]|<%[myNI]> !kick %[userNI] %[userCS]| <--- Kick $To: %[userNI] From: %[myNI] $<%[myNI]> You are being banned because: %[userCS]|<%[myNI]> is banning %[userNI] because: %[userCS]|<%[myNI]> !ban %[userNI] %[userCS]| <--- Ban $To: -OpChat- From: %[myNI] $<%[myNI]> Can some-one please double check the User %[userNI] becasue %[userCS]| <--- Sends PM to -OpChat- about users cheating description. $To: %[myNI] From: %[myNI] $<%[myNI]> The user %[userNI] has been found cheating because: %[userCS]| <--- Sends PM to yourself about users cheating description. I hope these work ok.

I have a quick question about using RAW commands in ApexDC. For some reason, no matter what RAW I use, the %[cheatingdescription] always seems to be ignored. :S This is becoming annoying as users are constantly quizzing me as to why they have been kicked. Here are a couple that I use... <%[mynick]> !kick %[nick] %[cheatingdescription]| $To: %[nick] From: %[mynick] $<%[mynick]> You are being kicked because: %[clienttype] - %[cheatingdescription]|<%[mynick]> is kicking %[nick] because: %[clienttype] - %[cheatingdescription]|<%[mynick]> !kick %[nick] %[cheatingdescription]|

So there is. Sorry about that. I suppose it was because I am used to seing them like this... Nice work on the client. I am very impressed with what I see so far. I have not been this happy with a client since I helped out with DCDM++. Just lacking in a couple of features in my opinion but on the whole as good / if not better than the rest! Clean, Tidy, Fast and on the whole, reliable!

Just my opinion but I think it would be good to see the right click features that are available in other clients for checking file lists and client type's. It would be useful for when in hubs where you don't want to check everybody. There are still some Oldskool Ops out here who see a dodgey looking user and want to run checks on them.

I would love to see Regexp in ADL Search. I think it would top of an excellent client!