[00:38:39] <pupnik> for wut gekz?
[00:38:46] <Gekz> uClibc
[00:38:47] <Gekz> lol
[00:38:47] <pupnik> i broke my n900
[00:38:51] <Gekz> :O
[00:38:52] <Gekz> how
[00:38:52] <pupnik> ah nyea
[00:39:04] <pupnik> installing crap
[00:39:14] <pupnik> trying to fix
[00:39:24] <pupnik> hard when it cant boot
[01:28:35] <Gekz> lol
[01:28:37] <Gekz> fucked it up again
[01:28:48] <Gekz> this is like the 8th time I've seen uClinux been built
[01:52:33] <-- barra_mta has left IRC ("Verlassend")
[02:17:45] <pupnik> man
[02:17:47] <pupnik> http://cgi.ebay.de/HP-Compaq-2710p-Tablet-U7600-2GB-RAM-wie-2730p-Dell-XT_W0QQitemZ140354130046QQcmdZViewItemQQptZDE_Technik_Computer_Peripherieger%C3%A4te_Notebooks?hash=item20adc2107e
[02:17:52] <pupnik> nice tablet pc
[07:11:30] --> Avenger has joined #gemrb
[07:11:35] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Avenger
[07:11:39] <Avenger> hi
[07:13:04] <Avenger> fuzzie, i think the pomab bug is not because we don't have enough queueing and asynchronicity. But, because we do some :)
[07:14:25] <Avenger> we evaluate the conditions, and queue all responses into the action queue. For all actors. Then after all conditions were evaluated, we execute the actions.
[07:15:18] <Avenger> The solution would be to call PerformActions after an evaluation, so the first block of immediate actions would be executed before the next actor evaluates its script.
[09:11:36] <fuzzie> no
[09:11:43] <fuzzie> i mean, you shoudl read what i say :-)
[09:11:51] <fuzzie> there's a big comment there that says: i change it, for a race condition
[09:12:29] <fuzzie> and the race condition can also be fixed with messages.
[09:13:11] <fuzzie> but you break SoA/bg1/everything if you change it back without messages :-/
[09:13:35] <fuzzie> at the time i didn't know messages existed, i just knew that it didn't work if you did actions immediately
[09:14:03] <fuzzie> but clearly that pomab script expects actions to be done immediately, so messages are the only solution :)
[09:15:08] <fuzzie> but now we have at least .. four things which need messages? so it has to be done
[09:16:50] <fuzzie> maybe i should just add them? it doesn't seem hard, and i could do it from here
[09:19:41] <fuzzie> maybe 'DelayedAction' or something? it makes more sense to do it with subclasses, but i forget what we discussed
[09:36:02] --> barra_library has joined #gemrb
[10:20:58] <Avenger> i don't know how could it be done
[10:21:36] <Avenger> how would messages help if all conditions are evaluated before any actions performed
[10:21:45] <fuzzie> oh, we have to fix that too
[10:22:28] <Gekz> use Objective C
[10:22:32] <Gekz> everything is messages!
[10:22:53] <fuzzie> i mean, sorry, i definitely wrote that code wrong, PerformActions has to be called after an evaluation :)
[10:23:00] <fuzzie> but: messages need to be added first
[10:23:07] <Avenger> hmm, i see
[10:23:26] <Avenger> so you say, we need to perform actions immediately, except for some stuff needs to be queued
[10:23:32] <fuzzie> yes
[10:23:40] <Avenger> i see, and most likely you are right
[10:23:48] <fuzzie> and i thought: well, if some things need to be queued, why not queue everything?
[10:23:52] <fuzzie> but that was stupid of me :)
[10:24:02] <fuzzie> because i didn't think of things like this pomab.
[10:25:03] <Avenger> well, who would have thought that :P i'm sure it could be scripted safely
[10:25:25] <Avenger> they just made it this weird way
[10:26:28] <fuzzie> my next thought was to just add the Action objects themselves to some internal queue. that is maybe possible, but we'd have to make copies and store the objects inside them.
[10:28:13] <fuzzie> and maybe it's more sensible just to copy whatever the IE does..
[10:28:20] <fuzzie> but you know that better than me :)
[10:28:52] <Avenger> well, i wouldn't just copy everything... some stuff is lame.
[10:29:14] <Avenger> if you meant specifically this message stuff
[10:29:32] <Avenger> well, if we ever want multiplayer, we need to 'copy' it somewhat
[10:29:48] <Avenger> it is mostly for multiplayer synchronisation
[10:30:20] <fuzzie> my first thought is some 'DelayedAction' class, with subclasses like 'DelayedEffectApply' and 'DelayedCutSceneMode' and etc, but that is maybe a bit crazy
[10:30:26] <Avenger> do you still know why you needed to break performattack?
[10:30:37] <fuzzie> did i break performattack?
[10:30:40] <Avenger> cutscenes?
[10:30:44] <Avenger> ahh performaction :)
[10:30:53] <fuzzie> oh
[10:31:06] <Avenger> i meant evaluating of conditions vs executing the action queue
[10:31:13] <fuzzie> several things :-/
[10:31:22] <fuzzie> the cutscene in bg1 with cutscenes was one of them
[10:31:28] <Avenger> so, several things just magically fixed after this?
[10:31:30] <fuzzie> there were a couple of other ones with actors dying
[10:31:49] <fuzzie> yes, and we can remove some hacks, too :)
[10:32:04] <Avenger> so, if you revert just this one separation we can expect to break several things?
[10:32:13] <fuzzie> yes
[10:32:19] <fuzzie> it is the right thing to do, though
[10:32:22] <Avenger> is there a list of them?
[10:32:36] <fuzzie> no :) maybe some of it is in irc logs
[10:32:36] <Avenger> going down right to the offending action
[10:32:54] <Avenger> i should read the code of these actions carefully
[10:33:08] <Avenger> to see if they do any messaging stuff
[10:33:10] <fuzzie> but i know of: effect application (including Die, which should apply fx_death apparently? you would know), cutscenes and ClearActions
[10:33:24] <Avenger> hmm, ok
[10:33:34] <fuzzie> i would also be interested to know if TextScreen and IncrementChapter do it.
[10:33:50] <Avenger> die: it should "always" apply the death opcode
[10:33:54] <Avenger> that is clear by now
[10:34:02] <fuzzie> we have some bugs there but i think they are the cutscene bug.
[10:34:31] <Avenger> we could probably get away with the cutscene flags, and fix die to apply effects.
[10:34:32] <fuzzie> (if you call StartCutSceneMode, then TextScreen, then gemrb starts the cutscene first! not good)
[10:34:47] <Avenger> hmm, those could probably be swapped
[10:35:02] <fuzzie> swapped?
[10:35:03] <Avenger> it is checking some game flags, i think
[10:35:29] <fuzzie> i mean, if you make cutscene a message, it fixes that, i hope
[10:36:01] <Avenger> ahh, i see, cutscene is not a QF_* thing, but TextScreen already is. because it is using guiscript.
[10:36:44] <Avenger> so, if you make cutscene a QF thing, their order will be as we execute those flags
[10:37:01] <Avenger> which may or may not be good
[10:37:26] <fuzzie> TextScreen() just calls RunFunction directly
[10:37:40] <fuzzie> that is fine, i think
[10:38:09] <Avenger> hmm...
[10:38:13] <fuzzie> and, yes, i guess you could make QF_CUTSCENEON and QF_CUTSCENEOFF flags, but then you still have other message problems
[10:38:41] <fuzzie> you could also add a flag for clear actions, and a queue for the effects..
[10:38:43] <Avenger> you are right, but i think the code isn't
[10:38:46] <fuzzie> but it makes more sense to me to just write the messages
[10:39:14] <Avenger> well, if you want to write a complete message system, that would be very helpful
[10:39:34] <Avenger> i can help you by reading the code, at this moment
[10:40:18] <fuzzie> well, i just think of a std::vector<DelayedAction *>. it seems not so complicated.
[10:41:29] <Avenger> yeah, well, you build the base framework, i will read IE code, and probably add refinements if i see something :)
[10:42:18] <Avenger> i'm unsure if this runfunction in middle of action code is perfect
[10:42:32] <Avenger> i'm pretty sure you could cause infinite loops :)
[10:42:39] <Avenger> i mean, heap overflows
[10:42:52] <Avenger> from script you could issue action textscreen :)
[10:43:01] <Avenger> that is not a good design
[10:43:14] <Avenger> it needs a flag or whatever, your delayed action would also fix it
[10:43:38] <fuzzie> if we delay TextScreen too, then problems happen, i think
[10:43:50] <fuzzie> because: if you call StartCutSceneMode and then TextScreen, the TextScreen should run *first*
[10:44:56] <Avenger> huh, that is an interesting case. THAT could only be done by the EF/QF thing i wrote. If both flags are set, the order of the flag detection could be hardcoded
[10:45:25] <Avenger> so, it might be that we cannot avoid throwing everything at it :)
[10:45:43] <Avenger> runfunction cannot stay in any actions, that's clear
[10:45:52] <fuzzie> huh, maybe it is more complicated than i thought :/
[10:46:03] <Avenger> that was just a 'temporary' solution
[10:47:07] <Avenger> you know what, i look at the textscreen action now ;)
[10:47:34] <fuzzie> that would be good
[10:47:42] <fuzzie> i look at wjp's hack for cutscenes at the start of IWD
[10:47:46] <fuzzie> but i guess messages would fix that problem fine
[10:47:47] <Avenger> it seems short, so it is most likely just a message
[10:48:00] <fuzzie> and the other problem is that textscreen must store mouse state
[10:48:11] <Avenger> hmm no, it seems direct code
[10:48:24] <fuzzie> and that can be done wherever the textscreen code is
[10:48:51] <Avenger> well, the bio guys had an easier time, their gui is hardcoded into the engine
[10:49:04] <Avenger> so they could avoid looping
[10:49:15] <fuzzie> but it would be easier for gemrb if textscreen *didn't* send a message, i guess :)
[10:49:25] <Avenger> it seems it doesn't
[10:49:35] <fuzzie> so then we can just put a flag check in the right place
[10:49:56] <fuzzie> and hope that no-one is silly enough to do two textscreens at once..
[10:52:58] <Avenger> hmm what resource is '25ecred'
[10:53:31] <Avenger> a 2da, it seems hardcoded into textscreen
[10:53:41] <fuzzie> end credits for ToB?
[10:53:48] <fuzzie> i guess based on 'ecred' and '25' :)
[10:54:20] <Avenger> yes, i was more interested in its filetype ;) it seems a special textscreen
[10:54:42] <Avenger> probably called by EndCredits
[10:55:11] <Avenger> but at this depth, the two branches flown into a single path of execution
[10:55:26] <fuzzie> well, i guess you know it's a 2da?
[10:55:39] <Avenger> now i know i didn't know when i asked :)
[10:55:49] <Avenger> just thinking loud
[10:56:05] <fuzzie> ok. i only have bg1 on this laptop, bit lost :)
[10:56:36] <fuzzie> but EndCredits kicks you out of the game when done, so i can imagine a special-case there..
[10:56:49] <fuzzie> but i guess if it's a 2da then it's probably not that
[10:57:59] <Avenger> it is a kind of textscreen 2da for the end credits. A list of bmps and strrefs
[10:58:15] <Avenger> it seems it is possible to alter the ending textscreen based on conditions
[10:59:05] <fuzzie> but those strrefs are identical or 0?
[10:59:30] <fuzzie> i don't know what the bmp files are :) but i guess it was unused other than those?
[11:01:16] <Avenger> there are 2 columns having any strrefs they contain this string only: THRONE OF BHAAL CREDITS
[11:01:41] <Avenger> but there are 12 columns, each with a bmp resref
[11:02:22] <Avenger> credi_(01-12). they contain some concept art graphics
[11:03:00] <Avenger> but i think it is more important that this file is processed by the same textscreen routine
[11:03:13] <Avenger> its structure is similar
[11:03:15] <fuzzie> hmm
[11:03:27] <fuzzie> maybe based on the Solar conversation and the final decision?
[11:03:36] <fuzzie> i know the end movie changes based on those
[11:03:46] <fuzzie> but i assume that bit is scripted
[11:04:03] <Avenger> i think this one is just switching the concept art bmps based on time
[11:04:15] <fuzzie> oh, boring :)
[11:04:40] <Avenger> and i think it is specially handled because it doesn't use the same setup window as normal textscreen
[11:04:52] <Avenger> but this we can wire into the guiscript
[11:05:12] <Avenger> so EndCredits is simply a TextScreen("25ecred") or something like that.
[11:06:07] <fuzzie> well, and then a force quit, i guess
[11:11:23] <Avenger> well, i don't understand all parts of this, but it is clear there are no messages involved
[12:10:09] --> barra_away has joined #gemrb
[12:15:37] <-- barra_library has left IRC (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
[12:43:13] --- barra_away is now known as barra_library
[13:38:58] <fuzzie> Avenger: does Dialog send the cutscene message too?
[13:39:04] <fuzzie> i don't know how annoying it is to find that out
[13:39:07] <Avenger> let me see
[13:39:18] <fuzzie> but it looks like i have to make it send a message too, for things to work
[13:39:23] <Avenger> why would a dialog send a cutscene message?
[13:39:35] <fuzzie> when you start a dialog, it stops cutscene mode
[13:39:48] <Avenger> ah i see
[13:40:50] <Avenger> not directly, that's sure. StartCutsceneMode and EndCutsceneMode calls it
[13:41:11] <fuzzie> or maybe that is a side-effect: perhaps they have a 'start dialog' message which does it :|
[13:41:18] <fuzzie> i guess for multiplayer that would make more sense
[13:41:18] <Avenger> but they might set a flag inside
[13:41:56] <Avenger> or they send the message fromsome deeper code
[13:45:03] <fuzzie> how do the messages which send both a message and make the change work, do you think?
[13:45:16] <fuzzie> do they set some "do not apply this locally" flag on the message?
[13:45:29] <Avenger> i don't know
[13:45:57] <Avenger> sometimes i see them changing a flag locally, and then send a message which does the same thing
[13:46:06] <Avenger> but sometimes they don't do anything locally
[13:46:22] <fuzzie> and that confuses me :)
[13:46:47] <Avenger> i assumed all messages are global, just some stuff gets set twice
[13:47:27] <fuzzie> what about things like combat, though?
[13:47:40] <fuzzie> or inventory changes?
[13:47:45] <fuzzie> they must have messages, but you don't want to do them twice
[13:47:52] <fuzzie> i know, those are probably very annoying actions to try and read :/
[13:48:05] <Avenger> some stuff in inventory actually gets applied twice :)
[13:48:17] <Avenger> equipping effects for example
[13:48:38] <Avenger> when you equip an item, the effect is called at least twice immediately when you equip its item
[13:48:59] <Avenger> it is actually very annoying when i debug effect opcode
[13:49:42] <fuzzie> well, i wondered about removing items :)
[13:50:02] <fuzzie> but maybe they don't care so much about that..
[13:50:16] <Avenger> ok back to your previous question
[13:50:24] <fuzzie> everyone uses that exploit in the original engine where you can replace a potion with a gem and it will happily break the charge count, i guess
[13:50:51] <Avenger> i read about that but i never found it
[13:51:07] <Avenger> that is because gems got an extended header, i guess
[13:51:31] <Avenger> it is actually very ugly, i dont' know why they got an extended header
[13:54:51] <fuzzie> i'm not really sure how to test my original question about dialog messages
[13:58:16] <fuzzie> and it sets me off wondering about multiplayer :)
[14:10:25] <-- Gekz has left IRC ("Leaving")
[14:27:38] --> zefklop has joined #GemRb
[14:28:08] <zefklop> hi everybody!
[14:28:13] <fuzzie> hi, zefklop :)
[16:04:09] <Avenger> ok, i looked into the dialog action and i found the following messages: set ready stance, apply effect (force visible), apply effect (dispel sanctuary), set NumTimesTalked, send trigger (Said)
[16:04:45] <fuzzie> that is a lot of information :)
[16:04:59] <Avenger> i hope it is useful too :)
[16:05:04] <fuzzie> yes, it is
[16:05:21] <Avenger> it might be that other messages are called too
[16:05:34] <Avenger> the set ready stance message is actually chained
[16:05:47] <Avenger> there is a message which checks if the current action is a dialog action
[16:05:58] <Avenger> if it is, then it calls the true set ready stance message
[16:06:06] <Avenger> i guess this is a kind of hack, though
[16:07:18] <Avenger> and i hate the dispel sanctuary part
[16:07:35] <Avenger> why would dialogs remove it
[16:07:55] <Avenger> that is either an oversight or a necessity due to engine/story constraints. I don't know.
[16:10:29] <Avenger> i also see that ... has nothing to say to you. is displayed before! the forcevisible stuff
[16:10:33] <Avenger> that is also very odd
[16:11:58] <Avenger> there is a 'you are not permitted to initiate dialog' message too. That is for multiplayers where each player may/may not have the right to talk :)
[16:20:56] <Avenger> ahh finally i see why some Change... actions are more complicated than others
[16:21:32] --- barra_library is now known as barraAway
[16:22:05] <fuzzie> oh?
[16:24:30] <Avenger> hmm i thought they are not the same... but they are. well, anyway, they call a message called 'CMessageSpriteUpdate'. I think it is what alters avatar animations based on some stats
[16:25:18] <Avenger> assertion text is useful again
[16:27:22] <Avenger> i just don't know why the rest action would call it
[16:28:23] <fuzzie> reset to standard anims?
[16:30:14] <Avenger> i don't know. It is called by the following actions: rest, leavearealua, leaveareaname and all the change... actions.
[16:32:32] <fuzzie> so that makes sense, i guess
[16:32:58] <fuzzie> it would look silly to have actors mid-animation after they rested or moved areas :)
[16:35:09] <Avenger> this message is huge
[16:35:41] <Avenger> almost as big as the verbalconstant stuff, but that one is just a huge switch/case
[16:36:07] <Avenger> well, this one seems like inlined stuff
[16:38:01] <Avenger> oh, right this is not just updating the sprite
[16:38:12] <Avenger> i mean, the animation type
[16:38:22] <Avenger> this one does the searchmap update too, it seems
[16:39:02] <Avenger> found this text: CMessageSpriteUpdate::Run calling pSprite->RemoveFromArea()
[16:39:57] <fuzzie> ah
[16:40:17] <Avenger> also: CMessageSpriteUpdate: LoadArea for
[16:40:30] <Avenger> so, this seems to be a huge thing
[16:40:33] <fuzzie> so i guess it does more than just the anim change
[16:40:38] <Avenger> it is much more
[16:40:49] <Avenger> i wonder why is it messed up so much
[16:41:09] <Avenger> how would changealignment effect LoadArea :)
[16:42:49] <Avenger> i see this too: AREA-TRANSITION: CMessageSpriteUpdate::Run calling pSprite->ExecuteAction() id = %i ; Name = %s
[16:43:21] <Avenger> now, how that makes any sense. i suppose executeaction is the same as our performaction...
[16:43:52] <Avenger> and we are deep inside action code already
[16:45:31] <fuzzie> does Run() get called directly from the action?
[16:46:31] <Avenger> no, this is a message
[16:46:35] <Avenger> ahh
[16:46:38] <Avenger> you are right :)
[16:47:03] <Avenger> but still, from message, an action is called.... ???
[16:47:17] <Avenger> i hope i will see this better
[16:47:19] <fuzzie> i wonder what it could be
[16:47:22] <fuzzie> no idea which action?
[16:48:01] <Avenger> the actions i just mentioned, some of them are area changing actions and all the ids targeting field changer actions.
[16:48:13] <Avenger> like changealignment, changegender, etc
[16:48:58] <Avenger> looks like it is like our movebetweenareas code
[16:49:17] <Avenger> it can load a new area, removes the actor from the current area, etc
[16:49:34] <fuzzie> but presumably it only does that sometimes?
[16:49:39] <Avenger> it has text like: No final current location for walking sprite
[16:49:53] <Avenger> so this is also used for movement inside an area
[16:49:58] <fuzzie> so it would also take care of movement updates, animation changes, etc?
[16:49:59] <Avenger> i guess, searchmap update
[16:50:06] <Avenger> yes
[16:50:15] <fuzzie> so i guess you'd have to check the parameters from the actions to make much sense of it
[16:50:18] <fuzzie> that is kind of annoying
[16:50:24] <fuzzie> makes more sense to split it up more, you'd think
[16:50:27] <Avenger> well, no wonder it is so huge
[16:51:22] <Avenger> also some text that offers insight: ;;Trying to set sequence/position/direction for sprite that should be in an area
[16:51:52] <fuzzie> so all of those are possible, i guess
[16:52:29] <Avenger> yep, it seems like
[16:52:51] <Avenger> it is still weird how changealignment affects this. But i guess they just did a cut&paste
[16:54:16] <fuzzie> i can't think what changealignment would change
[16:54:30] <fuzzie> it makes sense for changegender, since that needs a sprite update
[16:55:08] <Avenger> yes
[16:55:55] <fuzzie> i guess copying it all and not thinking too much makes sense :)
[16:59:40] <Avenger> maybe our code will be even worse, as we have some customisable avatar setting, based on any stat
[17:00:26] <Avenger> going back to linux, be right back
[17:00:28] <-- Avenger has left IRC ("ChatZilla 0.9.85 [Firefox 3.5.3/20090824101458]")
[17:28:26] --> Avenger has joined #gemrb
[17:28:29] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Avenger
[17:28:35] <fuzzie> hi
[17:28:48] <Avenger> hi
[17:33:14] <fuzzie> making the messages work is kind of a pain
[17:33:21] <fuzzie> because, we still have no global ids for scriptables
[17:36:55] <fuzzie> so i have quietly broken stuff this way, meh
[17:36:59] <fuzzie> i guess that can be fixed
[17:37:06] <Avenger> ah yes
[17:37:12] <Avenger> that should be the first
[18:16:16] --> zefklop_ has joined #GemRb
[18:17:33] <pupnik> what for eg broke, fuzzzie?
[18:19:46] <Avenger> well if she put an object id into a message, but non-actors don't have object ids, then she broke everything that involves messages and non-actor targets. Like opening a door, if she added message there.
[18:20:21] <Avenger> but i don't know where she tried to add them
[18:21:55] <fuzzie> yes, i tried that :)
[18:22:04] <fuzzie> i don't want to be passing pointers around, and we'd need ids for multiplayer anyway
[18:22:25] <fuzzie> i reverted most of my message fiddling, but still, even for ClearActions i need scriptables.
[18:22:43] <fuzzie> pupnik: how was the rest of the maemo conference?
[18:22:54] <fuzzie> am still kicking myself for not going :)
[18:24:38] <pupnik> awesome
[18:24:52] <pupnik> some heated arguments re drm
[18:25:01] <pupnik> 2nd party was great
[18:25:15] <pupnik> and n900 + coffeeshops was fun
[18:25:48] <pupnik> hmmm
[18:26:08] <pupnik> is this chan logged
[18:26:19] <fuzzie> yes
[18:26:26] <fuzzie> hence the "Be wary of your words" in topic :p
[18:27:15] <fuzzie> need it edited?
[18:30:24] <pupnik> no
[18:30:35] <pupnik> was just going to blather a bit about n900 but it's not important
[18:31:02] <pupnik> pretty awesome device though. would be worth 300 easy
[18:31:53] <Avenger> bye, maybe later i come back
[18:31:54] <-- Avenger has left IRC ("bye!")
[18:33:05] <-- zefklop has left IRC (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[18:34:13] <pupnik> fuzzie: maybe you can get a dev discount
[18:34:34] <pupnik> would 1/2 price be interesting to you?
[18:34:59] <pupnik> would be worth a lot to have a gemrb guy on board
[18:35:14] <pupnik> imo, so I think i might be able to make a case for an exception discount
[18:35:30] <fuzzie> well, nokia seem in no rush to release the thing at the moment :(
[18:36:18] <pupnik> not sure what it is, suspect a few of those non-determinate bugs but don't know
[18:36:59] <pupnik> i think the discounted ones typically go for 300 euro in europe
[18:37:47] <pupnik> i'm not allowed to loan the device they loaned me
[18:38:11] <fuzzie> that would be tempting, although i imagine you're just as capable of doing gemrb stuff :)
[18:40:06] <pupnik> there are enough folks who know the maemo side of things who can do sdl builds
[18:40:21] <pupnik> i might be in it for some ui or performance tweaking
[18:40:47] <pupnik> hopefully properly submitted as #IFDEF'd patches or whatnot
[18:41:23] <pupnik> so far however, people haven't been shy of demoing even emulators at the nokia summits and on blogs
[18:41:53] <pupnik> so i really think you could get some promotional assistance if you would demo gemrb for them - like maybe working with me, and doing it *now*
[18:42:07] <pupnik> lemme get u email
[18:50:37] <pupnik> i'll also try a build myself when my system is repaired
[18:50:53] <pupnik> am using junker lappy atm
[19:15:19] --- barraAway is now known as barra_library
[19:15:56] --- barra_library is now known as barra_home
[20:08:50] <pupnik> fuzzie: ok well let me know if you want to get into this because i think it is a great opportunity for all kinds of future things, not just gemrb
[20:08:59] <pupnik> hasta la pasta
[20:57:35] --> pupnik_ has joined #gemrb
[21:13:51] <-- pupnik has left IRC (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[21:29:55] --- barra_home is now known as barraTV
[21:34:51] <pupnik_> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QkKUPiQ_o <<<< Carl Craig - My Machines (genius)
[21:59:46] --> pupnik has joined #gemrb
[23:21:04] <-- zefklop_ has left IRC (Client Quit)