opcodes

[raytrace]

Hi

I'm pretty new here to SEQ and was using it shortly before it was broken.

Anyways, I know enough C++ to get myself in trouble so I figured I would try my hand at fixing SEQ but I was wondering if the opcodes in the opcodes.h are correct.

If not, could someone please post the correct opcodes if you have them?

[wizard]

fucking priceless...

[raytrace]

So what is so priceless wizard?

Grant it, I'm no programming genius but at least I am making the effort to try to understand the SEQ code.

I've read thru the forums and I see several references to looking at the opcodes so I assume that the opcodes may be incorrect in the opcodes.h file.

I know nothing of using Ethereal or any other sniffer, but I am reading thru the PDF file on Ethereal's website.

I am making an effort to learn SEQ and hopefully be able to make a contribution, but you seem to find it funny that I may ask a question that is "fucking priceless".

Damn, it's no wonder the Devs jump ship with smart ass remarks such as yours.

If I'm wrong about something in SEQ then correct me. If I'm way off base and opcodes aren't the problem then point me in the right direction. Otherwise keep that black hole you call a mouth shut.

[Surak]

damn. always some goof who would rather insult people instead of keeping his mouth shut or trying to help.

good luck to you raytrace, hope you have blastfurnace quality flame sheilds for the jerks in this forum.

[uncleubb]

If, raytrace, you are actually trying to learn as you say you are, read through these forums a little bit more carefully. I believe that you will find your answer about the opcodes... You may be a tad embarrassed when you discover the answer.

If you are simply trying to be a smartass or trying in another way to post yet another hurry up message, puh-lease SHUT IT!

[wizard]

Originally posted by raytrace
So what is so priceless wizard?

If I'm wrong about something in SEQ then correct me. If I'm way off base and opcodes aren't the problem then point me in the right direction. Otherwise keep that black hole you call a mouth shut.

What is so fucking priceless was if we HAD THE FUCKING OPCODES SEQ WOULD WORK!

and that there must be 20 freakin posts about the same exact thing in one forum alone!

[raytrace]

No, I have searched and read thru all posts containing opcodes for the past month.

Yes, I may have overlooked something or haven't read back far enough. And then again I may have misunderstood the reference to look at the opcodes.h file.

In either case, I'm just asking for a little direction here and if I get flamed because I'm curious and asked a question because I wasn't able to find it (or overlooked it) in search then so be it.

Now as far as the opcodes not working, we have people in this forum who have SEQ working. high_jeeves is one of them. So some people obviously know what the opcodes are. So wizard, go back and read the forums yourself and you would realize this and maybe next time you'll keep your smart ass remarks to yourself.

As for those who have working SEQ's, could you please be so kind as to post the correct opcodes? If SEQ is still broken I'll either try to fix the code myself or wait until the devs put a working SEQ up on CVS.

[wizard]

Yes i have read those posts.. and it was made perfectly clear (at least to me) that the individuals that have working copies are not sharing the information.. for whatever reason.. they did the work and are entitled to do that. If they decide to share it with the rest of us.. great for us.. if they don't then we wait for the devs.. patiently. Sure I'm not happy about Seq not working.. but i played the game without it for 2 years, by damned i can do it again.

If the people who had them wanted to share them with the rest of us don't you think they would have done it long before yet another post asking for them or what they are? I do.. but then i have a little common sense.


If you want the opcodes follow the post made by someone asking how to find them.. I have neither the time nor the desire to do so myself since being without SEQ doesn't make me unable to play or function in Everquest.

[EnvyEyes]

Hmmm, interesting position, wizard....

Originally posted by mvern
Its kind of funny how quickly people jump to conclusions, especialy without knowing what all is involved in fixing SEQ after an encryption or netcode change. Its not just 'fixing a few opcodes', its breaking out a disassembler, hunting down the decryption routines, following whats happening with a debugger, logging a large amount of packets, and much trial and error, just to regain basic functionality. On top of that, things were changed around on test again a few days ago, including the encryption and some major struct changes.

Personally, I've been focused on deciphering whats changed on test since spending time fixing things for live, only to have it patched again in a couple of days is a bit of a waste.

mvern
Maybe I'm wrong, but it appears this discussion (http://seq.sourceforge.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3084) shed a little more light on what is involved it fixing things now. So perhaps raytrace isn't wrong and the help he is offering could be put to good use.

Save your flames for those who truely deserve them.... the ones who ask "iz seq borked or do I jus hab the rong codez?" for example. When someone is putting forth the effort to help out, STFU and let them. Perhaps if others followed this line of thinking, there would be far more "devs" on this project.

[wizard]

Originally posted by EnvyEyes
Hmmm, interesting position, wizard....

Maybe I'm wrong, but it appears this discussion (http://seq.sourceforge.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3084) shed a little more light on what is involved it fixing things now. So perhaps raytrace isn't wrong and the help he is offering could be put to good use.

Save your flames for those who truely deserve them.... the ones who ask "iz seq borked or do I jus hab the rong codez?" for example. When someone is putting forth the effort to help out, STFU and let them. Perhaps if others followed this line of thinking, there would be far more "devs" on this project.

the partial fix before LoY release was, from my understanding, because only some of the main opcodes were figured out.. alot were not at the time of the release.. in this latest round (not whats on test) i am sure it is opcode changes again for the most part..

and again my point that if the opcodes were known and at a point they could be published, they would be.. if you think about it, you need to be able to decrypt to get the opcodes, at least thats my understanding of how it works.. someone correct me if i am wrong.. so if we have the opcodes then all of the decryption is done.. the opcodes would then be the last pice of the puzzle to decipher what each one did now.

[raytrace]

Its not just 'fixing a few opcodes', its breaking out a disassembler, hunting down the decryption routines, following whats happening with a debugger, logging a large amount of packets, and much trial and error, just to regain basic functionality. On top of that, things were changed around on test again a few days ago, including the encryption and some major struct changes.

No, the opcodes alone will not be the key to the solution as any new/existing encryption will need to be decoded but will definitely be a step in the right direction.

This is why I asked in my original post if the opcodes in the current opcodes.h file was correct. If they weren't correct, then trying to decode the information in the packets would be a complete pain. Correct opcodes would just give me a solid springboard to use to dive into the code.

[Poncho]

Wow Wizard, slow down there big guy. No reason to have to defend every one of your posts. The poor guy was asking a valid question to start with. There was no wrong in that. If he is indeed new to SEQ, why not give a chance? We cant keep knocking people off like this, nor can we expect someone to wade through every damn post out there. If his question would have been "Is SEQ working?" that would be one thing, lest this is a bit different....

Raytrace: Your question leads to the root of our problem at this time. Sony has been changing their opcode and encryption as of late, and the community has had a tough time keeping up with the changes; and/or it has been somewhat of a pain to release patches just to watch them change again a few days later. In other words, your question hit the nail on the head. Short answer: if the community had the current and correct opcodes, SEQ would be fully functioning for the masses.

I for one, would like to see more collaboration with opcode progress as it happens. I am just learning, but having at least a couple "working" opcodes to look at in the datastream would go a long ways in helping me test and possibly weed out a couple more; and would really help me learn faster. I am not asking to be spoonfed. I am not looking for a patch as I fully understand why there hasnt been one released yet. A little bait for a few of us to go fishing with may prove to go a long way in the future.

Who is to say that Raytrace, or any other "new" fan of SEQ cant be another Mvern, Ratt, Casey Jeeves or the like? Opensource is very powerful, lets keep it that way.

Poncho

[Alwayslost]

Raytrace,

It is nice to see someone come here and attempt to jump in and get dirty.

Unfortunately you touched on a nerve as poncho stated, so you got an instant reaction that was a bit off from what you were probably looking for.

Thank you for joining the Quest for skittles!

GL!

[Raistlin]

Originally posted by Poncho
I for one, would like to see more collaboration with opcode progress as it happens. I am just learning, but having at least a couple "working" opcodes to look at in the datastream would go a long ways in helping me test and possibly weed out a couple more; and would really help me learn faster. I am not asking to be spoonfed. I am not looking for a patch as I fully understand why there hasnt been one released yet. A little bait for a few of us to go fishing with may prove to go a long way in the future.

Who is to say that Raytrace, or any other "new" fan of SEQ cant be another Mvern, Ratt, Casey Jeeves or the like? Opensource is very powerful, lets keep it that way.
Poncho

(Insert best southern baptist voice here) AMEN!!!!!!!! And lets here it again brother AMEN! (sorry, i'll quit now)

Well said. Raytrace, welcome to the forums, obviously you already figured out that flaming is a passtime here, and it gets worse when SEQ is broken...I swear you can figure out of SEQ works or not just by counting the number of flames...higher if it's broken, lower if it works...sort of like a local small town crack dealer going out of town for a week...the crime rate gets higher as everyone gets cranky.

Poncho said it best so i'll only add that one working opcode and what it does (i.e. WHen you open a door a packet with this opcode is sent) would probably get alot of us farther down the track to working. Though i'm not sure with the packet compression now if you'd need more than one correct opcode to flounder your way through the rest...as you can tell i've not yet really looked into the code.

Welcome to the effort, hopefully there are some of us that can start the colaboration effort...at the very least we can make ourselves all look like complete noob asses and start learning a bit about the software in the process..:)

At least, that's my intent.

[gremlinz]

I know I am probally going to get flamed for this, which is a little sad put hey gonna do it anyways. I am not a programmer and I realize it will take a while before I could put in positive action in to SEQ, but I do know some code mostly web dev stuff. So if some one could give me a starting point to read on web or deadtree (i like that ratt) I will read and practice like hell and prepare for war with soe so mayhaps I to can put forth some effort. :)

[Iam_Walrus]

Ratt put up this link (http://seq.sourceforge.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3095) in the General Discussion forum for the "where do I start?" stuff.

Good luck, mano.

[Poncho]

No need for a flame there Gremlinz, we wish you the best ;)

[Jaerin]

Well having started the process of figuring out how SEQ myself and actually making some progress with the help of a few generous individuals. I can say that the opcodes that I've found thus far have not changed persay. It does appear that the structs that those opcodes reference have changed though. Hence part of the reason that the map will change sometimes.

One thing I've learned is that the opcodes aren't 100% or even probably 10% of what is needed to decypher the EQ packets. There is a lot more too it. Finding the opcodes is generally fairly easy...decyphering the data that they describe is hard.

Jaerin

[Alwayslost]

Welcome to the quest for skittles gremlinz!!! GL!