Re: [Mldonkey-users] eDonkey2000.com Linux/*NIX forum

[Martin]

Peter Müller wrote...
> More or less the section becomes a "mldonkey only"
> one. Yet another reason for the inquisition. Maybe the
> forum-traffic becomes too expesive after releasing
> mldonkey 2.0. (:

Thats because the official linux client was not even worth a single post!

> Who cares? If mldonkey was bad, we were hunted. Now
> mldonkey tries to be everybodies darling, we are still
> the victims. If the next win32-server implements the
> "special" lugdunum-patches we are completely out of
> business.

Thats why i say make mldonkey invisible (undetectable by server). I
remember the days when noone even knew mldonkey existed...no mad
discussions about whats good or bad for the network (IMHO there a too
few peaople using mldonkey to do any harm....) no crazy server admins
trying to block evil clients...

> On the other hand the incomplete overnet-support is
> new munition for our "friends"...

Maybe true - but i dont thik of edonkey/overnet as two seperate
networks. Its one big network and when mldonkey still uploads to the
donkey network i can live with that!

BTW: Has anyone else noticed the increasing amount of
mldonkey-servers? In the latest maurice-list i found two mldonkey
general servers...(greets to lugdunum: there may be few mldonkey-users
but surely more mldonkeys than lugdunum-servers! i think about a new
mldonkey-option "connect_mldonkey_server_only = true" :])

Martin (enabled_server = true)
-- 
GPGKEYID=6E6C3431 / SERVER=WWWKEYS.DE.PGP.NET
Network Timeout: Erection reset by queer
upload_mldonkey_client_only = true???