[Bug-wget] [bug #50665] spelling fixes

2017-03-29 Thread Tim Ruehsen 
Update of bug #50665 (project wget):

  Status:None => Inspected  
 Assigned to:None => rockdaboot 

___

Follow-up Comment #1:

Thanks, how cool is that tool !

Just some questions / remarks:

- do not touch words beginning with '--' as these could be options, e.g.
'--dont-remove-listing' has been changed to '--don't-remove-listing'. That is
why I can't simply apply your patch.

- What about the doc/ directory ? I can't believe there are no typos in the
docs :-)

- Does the tool only check comments in source files ? Checking (printf)
strings would also be interesting... but maybe it does and just didn't find
any typos !?

- Wishlist: If the tool could git commit the changes with a detailed commit
message (e.g. optionally GNU style) and create a patch with 'git format-patch
-1', that would be amazing and a big step towards automatism.

Anyways, could you fix the first in the list and re-send a patch !?


___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/

Re: [Bug-wget] GSoC 2017

2017-03-29 Thread Shaleen 
Hi

I have prepared a draft of the proposal, please check it out and lemme know
you opinions.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17Le7dCTzY29Tk9gks1Ay7p2s3BTR-VI58SPzvl0ymeg/edit?usp=sharing

Thanks

Regards
Shaleen Jain

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 8:33 PM Tim Rühsen  wrote:

>
>
> On 03/28/2017 02:52 PM, Shaleen wrote:
> > Hey! I'm a student taking part in the GSoC 2017
> > and I'd like to work on the fuzzing framework for wget2
> >
> > I see there are around 461 WGETAPI's defined in wget.h, which API's do
> you
> > think should be fuzz tested?
>
> We leave this to you :-) Whatever looks the most promising to find flaws.
>
> As a suggestion, take a look into the test code coverage and start with
> something that is hardly (or not) covered by our tests.
>
> That is 'make check-coverage' and then view lcov/index.html with your
> browser.
>
> Keep in mind that we want (parts of) the fuzzer output being transferred
> into our test suite to test corner cases. Part of your work will be to
> create these tests as well.
>
> For your proposal, select a bunch of functions that seem most relevant
> to you (e.g. complex code that works with arbitrary external input and
> is used in Wget2, e.g. xml.c (xml and html parsing), the css parsing,
> the HTTP parsing.
>
> Make a plan about how you want to deal with your findings (and be
> prepared to find many flaws !). Maybe you would like to dive into the
> process of CVE reports.
>
> Regards, Tim
>
>

Re: [Bug-wget] PATCH: Fix FTBFS on GNU/Hurd

2017-03-29 Thread Svante Signell 
On Sat, 2017-03-11 at 12:48 +0100, Tim Rühsen wrote:
> Hi Svante,
> 
> On Freitag, 10. März 2017 14:20:56 CET Svante Signell wrote:
> > Hello,
...
> > Thank you for your attention.
> 
> You should address the gnulib project directly. You patch gnulib files, which 
> are imported/generated during the Wget build.
> 
> So please write to bug-gnu...@gnu.org. I am sure, your patches are welcome. 
> And with that all projects using gnulib will benefit in the future.

Hi again.

Doing some more searching I found that the problem in gnulib is already fixed by
the upstream patch: gnulib.git-4084b3a1094372b960ce4a97634e08f4538c8bdd.patch
dated 21 Feb 2017.

Since the latest version of wget is 1.19.1 was released 11 Feb 2017 this patch
is not yet in upstream wget. Maybe a new bug-fix release 1.19.2 would be useful?

Thanks!

Re: [Bug-wget] PATCH: Fix FTBFS on GNU/Hurd

2017-03-29 Thread Tim Rühsen 
On 03/29/2017 01:33 PM, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-03-11 at 12:48 +0100, Tim Rühsen wrote:
>> Hi Svante,
>>
>> On Freitag, 10. März 2017 14:20:56 CET Svante Signell wrote:
>>> Hello,
> ...
>>> Thank you for your attention.
>>
>> You should address the gnulib project directly. You patch gnulib files, 
>> which 
>> are imported/generated during the Wget build.
>>
>> So please write to bug-gnu...@gnu.org. I am sure, your patches are welcome. 
>> And with that all projects using gnulib will benefit in the future.
> 
> Hi again.
> 
> Doing some more searching I found that the problem in gnulib is already fixed 
> by
> the upstream patch: gnulib.git-4084b3a1094372b960ce4a97634e08f4538c8bdd.patch
> dated 21 Feb 2017.
> 
> Since the latest version of wget is 1.19.1 was released 11 Feb 2017 this patch
> is not yet in upstream wget. Maybe a new bug-fix release 1.19.2 would be 
> useful?

Thanks for reporting back !

The next release will include the latest gnulib.

Regards, Tim



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature