Official eMule-Board: Enhanced Client Recognition V2 - Official eMule-Board

nope. read.

tHeWiZaRdOfDoS, on 15 September 2009 - 08:19 AM, said:

besides, there is no point in maintaining a new or even two different definitions for the exact same thing.

this is just like when you are proposing fixes when there is nothing to fix or you are even suggesting wrong fixes. you do not read.

This post has been edited by Stulle: 15 September 2009 - 04:51 PM

Stulle, on 15 September 2009 - 07:48 PM, said:

Latest TS is without Emulate Others thus hash type of SO_OLD_MLDONKEY is not used (CUpDownClient::SendHelloTypePacket) and this is probably why the change in GetHashType (SO_OLD_MLDONKEY instead of SO_MLDONKEY - posted by Spike2) is not in TS.
WiZ was referring to the unreachable in Spike2 posted code which I commented about.

- so far for careful reading ...

god, please make him able to read the code. and i am saying this as an atheist... what has world come to?!

again, SO_OLD_MLDONKEY is unneeded no matter if you got emulate others or not. if there is no distinguishing old MLDonkeys there is no special treatment for different MLDonkeys and you can just comment the line in the emulate code... geeeeeez...

This post has been edited by Stulle: 16 September 2009 - 09:48 PM

EasyMule 2 detection:

Add this to CUpDownClient::InitClientSoftwareVersion() in Baseclient.cpp

 
 // Sundawner -->
 case SO_EASYMULE:
                                m_clientSoft = SO_EASYMULE;
                                pszSoftware = _T("easyMule");
                                break;
 // Sundawner <--

and Clientstatedefs.h

    SO_EASYMULE            = 8,    // Sundawner

This post has been edited by SundawnerAvS: 19 November 2009 - 09:38 AM

Thanx for that !! But I'd rather recode it to show it as what it is - an eMule-mod

Hm, it looks more like a fork to me.

well, as of their own claim easyMule v2 is entirely rewritten... and if it was not it is more likely they built that version on aMule rather than eMule because it is available for linux.

Stulle, on 20 November 2009 - 09:24 PM, said:

Would be new to me that they claim this and it would be pretty ridiculous anyway, as this version clearly uses the eMule core and code.

well, i cannot recall where i read this statement but i think i read somewhere that the new closed source version of EasyMule is claimed to be entirely rewritten. not saying the claim i read was truthful or definite but it's what i found somewhere in the back of my head. either way, making the current eMule code linux capable without any further programs (like WINE) seems like a pretty tough task to me and iirc did the new GUI look somewhat like aMule so it might at least be based on that now. either way, it has been months since i read this so i might well be mistaken at this point in time...

On their website I can't find anything about v2, only a download link... and I don't actually want to see that myself.

This is a bit offtopic since I can't figure what to code base or programming language an ed2k client is coded with, is relevant for it's recognition and or emulation (if needed). The only aspect it might affect is the emule mod modder that upadtes ECR and or emulate other ability to figure what is coded in such a client.

BTW: If someone is looking for producing an OS independent ed2k client, there's another option to be used as base (besides aMule) - named jMule. Last I read, their KAD is still unstable ...

found it, although it ain't the best of places i found this on:
blog entry on easyMule v2

Stulle, on 21 November 2009 - 07:07 PM, said:

Here's the original topic on VeryCD.com:
http://www.verycd.co...e2/704790.topic
You can see lots of replys were deleted by VeryCD. I also doubt if the green "support" and red "against" button are abusively clicked by VeryCD themself. In some easyMule feedback & development's group on VeryCD.com, it is common to delete topics or replys discussing about official eMule or Any mods other than easyMule or VeryCD mod. Users are told that VeryCD is the official dianlv(电驴), while dianlv(电驴) means eDonkey or eMule. As a commercial company, VeryCD just wants to fool their user, lets them not to know the real official eMule and other mods, making money from them.

In this topic, "gtoso" is an aMule developer, "godLaugh" is an easyMule developer, "Dash" is VeryCD company's owner, Mr. Huang Yimeng, the others are some chinese users.

At the end, VeryCD company's owner Dash said:

Quote

After that, he closed this topic.

This post has been edited by wenzhishen: 27 November 2009 - 06:32 PM

Wow, that sounds more like we should rather GPL-evildoer-ban them than trying to recognize them aMule is GPLed, too, just like eMule. I really hardly doubt they wrote it from the scratch judging by how simple even the nick-community in veryCD is coded...

If you search "eMule" in Google China, the first three result is www.emule.org.cn, www.emule.org.cn/download/, www.verycd.com (http://www.google.cn...l=zh-CN&q=emule).

They are all belongs to VeryCD company. emule.org.cn's the homepage for VeryCD Mod, which pretends to be the official homepage for eMule. Lots of Chinese think "VeryCD = eMule". I used to be one of them. It is ridiculous that eMule and aMule becomes a commercial company's own property and tools to earn a huge amount of money.

I suggest that the next version of DLP in Xtreme Mod and something like Client Analyzer should ban EasyMule 2.0 or higher. But now EasyMule 1 and VeryCD Mod seems to be OK, they need not to be banned.

This post has been edited by wenzhishen: 28 November 2009 - 09:07 AM

wenzhishen, on 28 November 2009 - 11:05 AM, said:

Banning due to search results (google or other) does not make any sense. If at all search engine companies might be contacted by those feeling search results do them wrong ...

Anyhow, Client Analyzer didn't ban upon modstr and I tend to believe it will not do so in the future.

taz-me, on 28 November 2009 - 05:52 PM, said:

Maybe my word was not clear so that you didn't get it. Search result, commercially using eMule, cheating users, all of these things are undesirable, but as you said, they are surely not the reason for banning at all, otherwise we'd better ban all the easyMule 1 and 2 and VeryCD Mod. #35 is not the reason, I just offered some more information for ya all. My suggestion was banning only easyMule 2 and the reason was GPL-Breaker (see #33 or more).

This post has been edited by wenzhishen: 28 November 2009 - 11:39 AM

wenzhishen, on 28 November 2009 - 01:19 PM, said:

Banning due to banned being GPL-Breaker is done via "evil doer" and as such should be in official - regardless of rightness of your suggestion, it is not related to ECR ...

hello guys:

First of all, let me introduce myself, I am the architect of easyMule2 project. I am sure that easyMule2 is rewriten completely.

As you known, there is very large amount of work to port existing emule code to other platform , aMule have done it prefectly, but the aMule code is based on emule. If I choose to base on the aMule architecture, there is almost impossible to add more protocols transfer function to the easyMule 2 project(such as bt/http/ftp), especially for BT protocol, which could package many files into one torrent task. so I decided to rewritten completely. In the development process, we use the ACE open-source object-oriented (OO) framework for cross-platform network communication (http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ACE.html )，use the wxWidgets ( http://wxwidgets.org/ ) for the UI layer develop，we have not use any GPL sourcecode .

Actually, easyMule2 is based on a P2P kernel architecture named "XPP", which has not only implemented ed2k protocol function, but also implemented HTTP,FTP,BT protocols. Based on this framework, we can very easy to extend more other protocol by static or dynamic plugin . The "XPP" framework is entirely different from emule or aMule.

Secondly, there are some viewpoint I must to explain.

* My suggestion was banning only easyMule 2 and the reason was GPL-Breaker. by wenzhishen:

There is no any proof to prove easyMule2 is GPL-Breaker, so i will list my sourcecode snap proof in the last part of this post.

* Why are they using a different clientID ? I think they should be returned as SO_EMULE since VeryCD is still just a mod. by Famerlor

Because easyMule2 is not a mod, it's completely rewriten, so we used a new clientID for the easyMule2.


At last , Now I will show some snapshot of easyMule2 project source code list:

Indeed, easyMule2 is based on a protocol transfer layer kernel named XPP, which can load protocol module by an dynamic method,ed2k is just one of p2p-protocol supported by XPP.


Picture1: source list of kernel ed2k protocol implement


Picture2: list of XPP kernel modules



Picture3: member list of TransferWithEd2k class, which is main protocol implement of ed2k


Picture4: all the protocols current easyMule2 implemented, also include BT protocol, but which is not public for beta test at this time;

This post has been edited by nightsuns: 09 December 2009 - 07:14 AM

what really strikes me odd is that there is little - if anything at all - to be found about that "XPP" thing you are talking about... even so, an entire review of all the sources would have to be made to verify you are not using a single snippet from eMule or aMule. IIRC, Wiz already succeeded in adding BT to eMule in a private project and HTTP download is already implemented to some extent. FTP is probably not much of a hussle but I would not know for certain. what i am saying is that messing about with the code layout may still leave GPL'ed code intact.

in fact, i sort of remember that someone of the Dev staff once said that it requires own reverse engineering of the protocols to not being under the GPL. that means to say that just reading the sources and copying it while changing layout and names won't get you anywhere. anyway, i might be mistaken here and my memory fails me... especially with KAD - i could not check if you added it just now - that should pose a major problem!