egghelp/eggheads community

Eggdrop doesn't recognize a . in it's nickname

2006-06-05T06:46:44-04:00

I'd suggest using another character which is neither a valid server or character password as splitting character. Maybe a '_', '|' or '^', they should be IRC compliant.

Statistics: Posted by De Kus — Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:46 am

Eggdrop doesn't recognize a . in it's nickname

2006-06-05T04:30:46-04:00

seems like not only the nick is messed up but the whole n!u@h is not IRC-compliant; my guess is eggdrop's n!u@h string splitting routines fail to produce correct results given the weird input format

Statistics: Posted by demond — Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:30 am

Eggdrop doesn't recognize a . in it's nickname

2006-06-04T12:41:25-04:00

it's a "pseudo" server that acts as a gateway for IRC clients to connect to the Everquest chat servers. It is called EQIMd.
it uses a nickname format of eqserver.charactername

Statistics: Posted by KevKev — Sun Jun 04, 2006 12:41 pm

Eggdrop doesn't recognize a . in it's nickname

2006-06-04T02:01:26-04:00

which server version are you on? it must be pretty weird, I've yet to see an ircd that allows dots in nicks, and I've seen many

Statistics: Posted by demond — Sun Jun 04, 2006 2:01 am

Eggdrop doesn't recognize a . in it's nickname

2006-06-03T14:53:38-04:00

I have an abnormal situation where a . is required in the bot's nickname.

Everything sees to work just fine, except none of it's msg/msgm binds will trigger properly.

All messages come across in the format:

Code:

[12:13] [Nick.WithDot!Host.WithDot@EQIMd to tunare.Tinkking] messgae here

Whereas normally they would show only the sender, not the receiever. This leads me to believe that somewhere in the msg system of eggdrop, the bot is saying "The msg target has a dot in it, therefore it's not directly for me, so i'm not going to trigger binds"

Where would I go looking for the code that defines this behavior?
Is there anyway to modify/disable this behavior (I understand this means editing code and recompiling as it's not going to be a configurable option or even a compile time option)?

Statistics: Posted by KevKev — Sat Jun 03, 2006 2:53 pm