Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

attach to another avatar

Keiko Doji
Registered User
Join date: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 23
06-20-2007 09:37
hi all

im trying to make an object which when given a command, rezzes another objet from inside, then on rez, calls up a sensor and produces a dialog window with local AV's nearby, im fairly sure i know how to do the sensor part but what im kinda stuck on, is the permissions, and getting the target av's key

ideally it would be
/44 rez
*object rezes*
*calls up the sensor*
*you pick your target*
*it asks the target for permission*
llAttachToAvatar blah blah blah....

if anyone can help, i would be greatful

thank you
byeeeeeeeee
RJ Source
Green Sky Labs
Join date: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 272
http://forums.secondlife.com/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=1557851
06-20-2007 09:56
Unfortunately, the avatar needs to be the owner of the object that is to attach to them.

From the wiki:

"Even though users other than the owner can grant this permission, attaching to them will fail with the message "Script trying to attach to someone other than owner!".

But example code to do the attach can be found at:

http://rpgstats.com/wiki/index.php?title=LlAttachToAvatar
Nectere Niven
Gadget Junky
Join date: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 211
06-20-2007 11:14
Could a follow accomplish the same task?
RJ Source
Green Sky Labs
Join date: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 272
06-20-2007 11:39
A follow is an alternate solution in many circumstances, yeah. But it's not as good as I think the attach would be: there's more lag and delay, and it costs more processing wise.
Destiny Niles
Registered User
Join date: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 949
06-20-2007 14:53
How about setting the rezzed object to sell original for $0L and on changed owner event attempt the attach?
Qie Niangao
Coin-operated
Join date: 24 May 2006
Posts: 7,138
06-20-2007 18:26
From: Destiny Niles
How about setting the rezzed object to sell original for $0L and on changed owner event attempt the attach?
That does work, and assuming it's something apparent enough to be readily "bought", seems like less work for the user than accepting Inventory, finding it in Inventory, and Wearing it. But it's still pretty clumsy, and I'm not sure the simplest change that would streamline the process without introducing a tool for griefing. Perhaps if a script could GiveInventory and specify that the recipient should have a defaulted option of Wearing when accepted. But there's probably some grief potential there, too.