Re: Re: Encrpted Passwords

Agreed about not having to run from the same shell.  I just wish I had the option to do otherwise.  Unfortionally I didnt.  
I should appoligise now for my previous comments, I was making the comments in context of networks running different paid accounts/shells for each ircd.  I know that this is far from always being the case and alot of networks do not have the limitations that I have with regard to how the network I am part of has to run the bopms. Again, I do appoligise.


droolin
> 
> From: Erik Fears <[email protected]>
> Date: 2003/11/07 Fri PM 03:08:44 EST
> To: droolin <[email protected]>
> CC: Philipp Kern <[email protected]>, 
> 	Wayne <[email protected]>,  [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Re: [bopm] Encrpted Passwords
> 
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:43:34PM -0500, droolin wrote:
> > It's a matter of the unrealircd conf Eric, if I rember back to when I origionally set it up.  This was the only way that an oper status was able to see the connects.  That is the only reason for the global oper status.  Beleive this only occurs with the unreal ircd.
> > I thought that the origional concept was that each shell should have its own bopm?  On our network, due it being set up as shell accounts.  This is the only means to run an individual bopm to each ircd.  Its not a matter that I want to, just that I have to.  Or run them all from one server accessing all the servers, and I think that defeats the best features of the bopm. 
> >
> 
> The original concept was that each server has its own bopm. This does not mean that the bopm has to be run from the same shell.
> 
> -Erik 
>