+- LCKB (https://lckb.dev/forum)
+-- Forum: ** OLD LCKB DATABASE ** (https://lckb.dev/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=109)
+--- Forum: Guides & Help Section (https://lckb.dev/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=193)
+---- Forum: Tutorials & Guides (https://lckb.dev/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=124)
+----- Forum: Ep4 Guides (https://lckb.dev/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=125)
+----- Thread: November Source Bug/ Dupe Fix Release (/showthread.php?tid=4742)
- dethunter12 - 05-16-2021
yes, well im not sure about implementing them to june files why not just download november source and use it?
- BayBay - 05-16-2021
21 minutes ago, dethunter12 said:
yes, well im not sure about implementing them to june files why not just download november source and use it?
Because I've been working for a while with June files and it would be a waste if i leave them now lol
- Desarija - 05-16-2021
4 hours ago, BayBay said:
Because I've been working for a while with June files and it would be a waste if i leave them now lol
If you want to switch to november source, you could use a program like CodeCompare to compare your current june source to a clean june source, it will show you all the things you edited and you can easily move them to november source. However, i‘m sure it’s possible to apply these fixes to june, i might share it here once i‘ve done it^^
thanks /index.php?/profile/2167-dethunter12/&do=hovercard" data-mentionid="2167" href="/index.php?/profile/2167-dethunter12/" rel="">@dethunter12 for the releases!
- Scura - 05-16-2021
3 hours ago, Desarija said:
If you want to switch to november source, you could use a program like CodeCompare to compare your current june source to a clean june source, it will show you all the things you edited and you can easily move them to november source. However, i‘m sure it’s possible to apply these fixes to june, i might share it here once i‘ve done it^^
thanks /index.php?/profile/2167-dethunter12/&do=hovercard" data-mentionid="2167" href="/index.php?/profile/2167-dethunter12/" rel="">@dethunter12 for the releases!
Same problem of /index.php?/profile/8659-baybay/&do=hovercard" data-mentionid="8659" href="/index.php?/profile/8659-baybay/" rel="">@BayBay. Since I'm using Reza 1776 is really impossible take the original code from November release. Btw I've tried to compare the November code with those sources and I found many errors and differences. Seems is missing many error code, so you have to change the errors struct in server and client side. I've started with that but many errors come out after changes ?, plus i've changed tons of stuff and i've fixed many others so is impossible revert all the project in nov release, I've to find a way for implement it in Reza 1776. I wanna publish it as /index.php?/profile/18894-desarija/&do=hovercard" data-mentionid="18894" href="/index.php?/profile/18894-desarija/" rel="">@Desarija after i found a way.
Btw thanks /index.php?/profile/2167-dethunter12/&do=hovercard" data-mentionid="2167" href="/index.php?/profile/2167-dethunter12/" rel="">@dethunter12 for the release ❤️
- Reza - 05-16-2021
you are all idiots lmao its funny how i wrote this [CeNsOrEd] because i understand it but you all cant even copy it without a [CeNsOrEd] guide and a person holding your [CeNsOrEd]
- BayBay - 05-16-2021
7 hours ago, Reza said:
you are all idiots lmao its funny how i wrote this [CeNsOrEd] because i understand it but you all cant even copy it without a [CeNsOrEd] guide and a person holding your [CeNsOrEd]
we don't have the knowledge you have its obvious...
- dethunter12 - 05-16-2021
okay, yes give me some time to make the files.
- WhosUrDaddi - 05-29-2021
Good release but all i can say is do not just copy and paste blindly. Some of these fixes are bad and will probably create other issues for your server.
- theDJ - 06-13-2021
For those who didn't know the dmg hack (with apets) before:
doFuncItem.cpp
in this function
void do_ItemWear(CPC* ch, CNetMsg::SP& msg)
right after
CItem* item = ch->m_inventory.getItem(packet->tab, packet->invenIndex);
insert
if (packet->wearPos != WEARING_PET && item->IsAPet())
{
CNetMsg::SP rmsg(new CNetMsg);
ResponseClient::ItemWearMsg(rmsg, ResponseClient::WEAR_ERR_INVALID_POS);
SEND_Q(rmsg, ch->m_desc);
return;
}
- Veni - 06-13-2021
better way is to first remove the wear position from the packet itself. the client does not need to send that info to the server, the server should check and determine that itself.
so in the end you should do something like this:
CItem* item = ch->m_inventory.getItem(packet->tab, packet->invenIndex);
int wearPos;
wearPos = item->m_itemProto->getItemWearing()
// change all packet->wearPos to the varaible like this
if (wearPos < 0 || wearPos >= MAX_WEARING)
{
CNetMsg::SP rmsg(new CNetMsg);
ResponseClient::ItemWearMsg(rmsg, ResponseClient::WEAR_ERR_INVALID_POS);
SEND_Q(rmsg, ch->m_desc);
return ;
}
Sure, you check if it's an "APet", but you dont check if its a normal pet. With this you also dont check if the item is an experience booster.
If you see code like this you should fix it properly and not just half of it