Hub Specific Shares....help needed

[PJ_Consumer]

Let me preface this by saying that I searched the forums for about 15 mins and still didn't get an answer to my question. This was the most related link --> http://dcplusplus.sourceforge.net/forum ... =different shared hub

Anyhow, I wanted to ask, has this feature has been integrated into the newest version of DC++ yet? I keep waiting and waiting. I'm currently using 1.72 and 1.8 to connect to 2 different hubs with different shares (Win2000). Now I need to join a third one (that has specific share requirements as well). I cannot use the same shared dirs in each hub.

I'm running out of old DC++ versions to use, can someone enlighten me please?

-pp

P.S. - I can't turn my HTML on in here.

[Hawklord]

you can open as many hubs as you like and still use the same shared folders in all hubs and you only need to use 1 version of dc++ as I think it will load at least 15 hubs at once.

[Guest]

That's precisely my point. I DON'T want to have the SAME shared dirs for different hubs.

I want to have DIFFERENT shared dirs for different hubs.

still waiting...
-pp

[Garet Jax]

Can't You use same version of DC++ 3 times? Make 3 copies of DC++ and run the other two using "run as.." (right-click on DCPlusPlus.exe).
Unless perhaps it's working only under Win XP...

[sarf]

Well, PJ_Consumer, if you have a problem with getting a rise out of your HTML, you are advised to seek help elsewhere...

However, as you seem to want the feature - either a) code it yourself and submit it to arnetheduck (trust me - if it works and is not too ugly it will be used) or b) hex-edit your DC++ executable file as detailed here (and yes, I am pimping my own posts ) and use several directories.

The main problem with this feature is that it requires a refactoring of a core component of DC++ - currently, the ShareManager is not easily remade into hub-specific shares - and since this is a feature that will probably lessen the amount shared on many hubs, it is not highly prioritized.

Sarf
---
The mutant alien skull man has a smile for all smiles, an answer for all answers.

[Guest]

Thanks for the response. I am saddened to learn that this option doesn't yet exist. I quit coding after I got out of college. It makes my brain hurt. So the best way is to have multiple versions going??

thanx

[sarf]

No, the best thing to do is to run multiple copies of the same version (the latest version).

Sarf
---
First I must sprinkle you with fairy dust...

[GargoyleMT]

No, the best thing to do is to run multiple copies of the same version (the latest version).

He has a version newer than the latest version:

I'm currently using 1.72 and 1.8 to connect to ...

[sarf]

Well... if it is newer than the version we know of, then it must be the latest version, right?

Sarf
---
Damn the torpedoes.

[GargoyleMT]

Well... if it is newer than the version we know of, then it must be the latest version, right?

Damn you and your almightly "logic," Sarf!

[Nazo]

Can I please have a copy of 1.8? I want to see what stuff they came upw ith in the future, then submit the new stuff as my own work ^_^

[GargoyleMT]

Can I please have a copy of 1.8? I want to see what stuff they came upw ith in the future, then submit the new stuff as my own work ^_^

Oh no, I sense a time paradox!

Anyhow, although moderately funny, it does seem to be a relatively common issue, people don't seem to deal well with version numbers that aren't in the #.# form. Even with the releases that have 3 digit numbers, people tend to name it based on the first two numbers.

That isn't a problem, just an observation.

[Nazo]

I think I see what it is, he just multiplied his version numbers by 100 I bet. So what he really had was 0.172 and 0.180. That's my guess anyway.

You are right though GargoyleMT. Especially when you have three decimals like nero's 5.5.10 or whatever. That gets so terribly confusing because when you look at it, it seems like 5.5.10 is a lower version than 5.5.9 because that last digit is 10 not 1 since they didn't follow the rules of going up to the next digit. It gets so complicated with some of these things like that that even I get confused often, and I thought I was used to these sorts of things. Probably this is why microsoft stopped going with stuff like saying windows 3.11 and nt4, but now say win 95 and win 2000 instead of win 4.0 and win nt5.

[GargoyleMT]

It gets so complicated with some of these things like that that even I get confused often, and I thought I was used to these sorts of things. Probably this is why microsoft stopped going with stuff like saying windows 3.11 and nt4, but now say win 95 and win 2000 instead of win 4.0 and win nt5.

True, but they still use three digit version numbers in all of their EXE files and DLLs (more than a handful, at least). It's Major.Minor.Build near as I can figure. For instance, the DBGHELP.DLL that's included in DC++ is 5.1.2600.

XP will sort files containing simple .decimal values numerically, instead of lexographically, but I agree that it's confusing from a human point of view.

[cyberal]

so, all we need now is a guy that:

1. know c++
2. know dc++
3. have nothing to do at all
4. ia willing to remake the share manager

anyone?

[GargoyleMT]

cyberal, you forgot:

5. has an innovative solution about how to identify the hub of two people with identical nicks.

This is a basic problem in multi-hub DC++ and NMDC Mac & 2.0+

[Melkor]

I've been thinking about this for 2 months, and the main reason i haven't coded this is: a) i have no experiance with VC b) more work then i want to do.