[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #63 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-05-31 16:17:51 EDT --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs- |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #62 from Simon Wesp 2009-05-31 10:37:39 EDT --- okay, then me only Package Change Request == Package Name: tor New Branches: EL-5 Owners: cassmodiah -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Comment #61 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-05-28 19:44:41 EDT --- Sorry, please correct my above comment as "I see no indication that Enrico wishes to have anything to do with an EPEL branch of this package". Obviously he still maintains the package in the regular Fedora branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs- --- Comment #60 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-05-28 19:20:50 EDT --- I found an ack from Enrico on IRC; I include it below: [15:31] ensc you recieved my mail? [15:33] ensc about tor [15:35] cassmodiah: no, did not saw such a mail [15:35] :-( [15:36] ensc http://fpaste.org/paste/13205 [15:39] cassmodiah: ah... no, I do not plan to do EPEL packaging. "Working" with CVS SCM takes too much time... the three FEdora branches are enough and I do not want two additional ones. [15:39] :-p [15:40] you need a co? for epel? I'm just a packager in training, but cwickert and rsc always help me out if i have a problem :-) [15:43] ensc thx. can i have the el5? [15:47] cassmodiah: yes; but you will have to do the necessary steps to add it to epel. I will approve you then (when required) [15:48] ensc i thought i create a cvs request for el5 with me as co :-p [15:50] cassmodiah: sorry; I do not have time for these steps [15:51] cassmodiah: you don't need any approval from the Fedora maintainer for EPEL branching [15:53] rsc i know, but i think i have to bring the respect to the maintainer and ask him/her first [15:54] cassmodiah: that's okay and good. I just wanted to note that. However, I see no indication that Enrico wishes to have anything to do with this package; the above would seem to indicate the contrary. So I won't branch with him as the owner without an explicit ack. Please reset fedora-cvs to '?' if that ack is received or if another CVS request is made without Enrico as an owner. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cassmod...@fedoraproject.or ||g Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #59 from Simon Wesp 2009-05-28 16:59:53 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: tor New Branches: EL-5 Owners: ensc cassmodiah -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-01 07:32 EST --- thx -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-25 14:10 EST --- MD5Sum 2d861e91e45a709acd921f26214319c1 tor-0.1.1.23-3.fc5x.src.rpm Both issues raised before have been fixed. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-25 02:42 EST --- thx * Mon Sep 25 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.23-3 - removed '.have-lsb' and related logic in logrotate script; check for existence of the corresponding initscript instead of - fixed bare '%' in changelog section http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/ > * The gpg file is nice in that it alerts me to its presence on the > upstream download site but unless I have the signing gpg key in my > web of trust... it's an habit from old fedora.us days. But I think a good one; being in somebody's web-trust is not so difficultly as your comment suggests. E.g. signer of tor is verified in my trustdb > W: tor mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs rpmlint bug; seems to be triggered by | sed -i -e '... | +'... which happens due to indentation reasons > W: tor-lsb hidden-file-or-dir /etc/tor/.have-lsb > E: tor-lsb zero-length /etc/tor/.have-lsb > W: tor-lsb non-conffile-in-etc /etc/tor/.have-lsb > - The .have-lsb file seems to be a marker identifying which set of init > scripts is installed for things like the logrotate script. So it's state > of the system rather than configuration. So not marking it %config makes > sense. But putting it in /var might be better than /etc. Also, is there > a reason to make it hidden? If not, perhaps: /var/lib/tor/have-lsb would > be better. I removed the '.have-XXX' stuff completely. But '/var/lib/tor' would have been a bad place because the have-XXX files are files used directly by 'root' while '/var/lib/tor' is owned by 'toranon'. Nevertheless, should not be an issue anymore. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-25 01:13 EST --- MD5Sum a1c6efad2d042b7b54da114852687df4 tor-0.1.0.15-setgroups.patch 33ce7155f545c4d30cb846d7017cc6c2 tor-0.1.1.23.tar.gz e1c9fd2bd8fb03c1f35028fbe7d19585 tor-0.1.1.23.tar.gz.asc 56c122286a73ed67308cf2864a246c7a tor.logrotate fa520d134658dc6919af24a1218b3676 tor.lsb c83c1cb67453e47bf710f899b9e58976 tor.spec 8cef32dff6452c22873846adc6041d86 tor-0.1.1.23-2.fc5x.src.rpm Cosmetic: * The gpg file is nice in that it alerts me to its presence on the upstream download site but unless I have the signing gpg key in my web of trust I'm still going to have to run around the internet verifying that the gpg signature comes from upstream and that the key that made it probably belongs to the developers by which time I've downloaded the file from the internet myself. So the case for including it is only so-so to me. (Not a blocker, though.) Rpmlint: *.src.rpm: W: tor strange-permission tor.lsb 0775 - Ignorable, this is the initscript for SysVinit. E: tor hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/lsb/install_initd E: tor hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/lsb/remove_initd - Ignorable, you're just calling chkconfig via the lsb standard names. W: tor macro-in-%changelog doc - Line 221 has a bare %doc instead of %%doc. W: tor mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs - Cosmetic. Rpmlint: tor: E: tor no-binary - Igorable as this is a meta-package. Romlint: tor-core: E: tor-core non-standard-gid /etc/tor/torrc toranon E: tor-core non-standard-gid /var/log/tor toranon E: tor-core non-standard-uid /var/lib/tor toranon E: tor-core non-standard-gid /var/lib/tor toranon - toranon is fine so these are ignorable. E: tor-core non-readable /etc/tor/torrc 0640 E: tor-core non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/tor 0730 E: tor-core non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/tor 0700 - Should be fine as well. E: tor-core incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/tor - rpmlint is confused because the package is named tor-core. This is ignorable. Rpmlint: tor-lsb: W: tor-lsb conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/tor E: tor-lsb executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/tor - As explained earlier, this is normal for init scripts. W: tor-lsb no-documentation - Documentation is in the main package. This is ignorable. E: tor-lsb non-standard-uid /var/run/tor toranon E: tor-lsb non-standard-gid /var/run/tor toranon - This is fine. W: tor-lsb hidden-file-or-dir /etc/tor/.have-lsb E: tor-lsb zero-length /etc/tor/.have-lsb W: tor-lsb non-conffile-in-etc /etc/tor/.have-lsb - The .have-lsb file seems to be a marker identifying which set of init scripts is installed for things like the logrotate script. So it's state of the system rather than configuration. So not marking it %config makes sense. But putting it in /var might be better than /etc. Also, is there a reason to make it hidden? If not, perhaps: /var/lib/tor/have-lsb would be better. E: tor-lsb postin-without-chkconfig /etc/rc.d/init.d/tor E: tor-lsb preun-without-chkconfig /etc/rc.d/init.d/tor - You're calling chkconfig by its lsb name, /usr/lib/lsb/install_initd so this is ignorable. W: tor-lsb incoherent-init-script-name tor - Once again, rpmlint is confused by the tor-lsb package name so this is ignorable. Good: * Source and signature matches upstream * Signature verified created by: #28988BF5: "Roger Dingledine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" and is a valid signature for the source. * Package meets the Naming guidelines * License, BSD, is OSI approved and matches what is documented in the spec. * LICENSE is included in %files. * BuildRequires are listed. * Package has no locales; language files in documentation are marked with the appropriate languages. * No shared libraries. * Not relocatable. * Package owns all the directories it creates. * No duplicate files listed. * Permissions properly set. * Package has a proper %clean section. * Macros used consistently. * Package contains code. * Documentation fits comfortably into the main package. * Documentation does not affect package at runtime. * No libraries. * Not a GUI application. * Package owns all files and directories that it creates and no extraneous ones.* Scriptlets are sane. They use fedora-usermgmt to create and delete a system uid/gid. They install the tor init scripts but don't start the service. * Builds in mock on x86_64. Summary: Fixing the macro in changelog and moving /etc/tor/.have-lsb to /var/lib/tor/have_lsb are the only things I see to be fixed here. If you're okay with those changes I'll approve. I've gone through all the previous comments as well and I think there's a bit of tempes
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 15:09 EST --- Although tsocks issues were discussed some comments above already, I will remove torify for now and add it back when tsocks exists. * Thu Sep 21 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.23-2 - simplified things yet more and removed tsocks/torify too - build -lsb unconditionally http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 14:45 EST --- it might just be me but does the tsocks package require... tsocks? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 14:38 EST --- Ok, you won: * Do Sep 21 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.23-0.1 - simplified spec file and removed -initng and -minit stuff http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 14:12 EST --- > - We've never had a policy for systematically splitting packages Exactly, there is no policy which says when to split a package. Until then, it is packager's choice whether he splits or does not split. My choice is, to split. > - If we were to use your strict splitting policy on all Fedora packages, > the total number of packages in Fedora would be multiplied by 3 or > 4. There's an inherent cost associated with increasing the number of > packages at the yum/rpm level. Is this cost measured in KB, seconds, used lines on display or bananas? Wouldn't they be outweighted by lesser dependencies and a smaller system? E.g. monolithic 'tor' might bring in initscripts, lvm2, udev... while a splitted tor brings only tor-core. Splitting seems to reduce inherent costs on yum/rpm level for me... Splitting will perhaps increase needed blocksize (1-4K) in the repository by one or two. The Used diskspace on the repository is cheap. Much cheaper than the bloat introduced by unneeded dependencies. > - Simplicity. Keep It Simple. Ok, I can remove the initscript stuff completely and provide single 'tor-lsb' and 'tor-initng' packages. Would just add two more reviews and people would complain that 'tor' main package does not have an initscript. As a compromise: I will keep -lsb in main package (as is) and remove only the -minit and -initng part. Would you accept this? > - Consistency to me is an important issue. What would bring you consistency here? Using 'yum install tor' installs consistently a 'tor' daemon with the appropriate initscripts; both with the splitted and bloated variant. > Consistency across other distributions for second. Package is for Fedora Extras; I do not request a review for Debian or Mandriva. > Not even 2M in size. Size of package does not matter for dependencies issues. A 20 byte perl script can bring in 50 MB of perl. > - Your refusal to collaborate with reviewers is hurting Fedora. Come on. Your refusal to accept views of packagers is hurting Fedora. = > 1) most, if not all other packages work like that. In Germany we have a proverb: "millions of flies can not err: shit tastes great". When you are new it might be good idea to follow the masses. But at some time you should turn on the brain and think yourself. > 2) you are insisting on custom non-FE requirements Ok, as written above, I will remove the -initng and -minit subpackage when this helps. I really do not want to continue this meta-discussion which consists only of personal views and unproved statements like "entire community". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 11:16 EST --- Re: comment 46 , Dennis said: > So please, either > - fold the package into one, so I can review it and let's get this over with > - close this bug and withdraw your review to give someone else the opportunity > to submit it. Also consider the possibility that you (both) can agree to disagree, and remove yourself as reviewer, and let someone else do it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 11:06 EST --- > Reviewers want the one-package structure but do not give a single argument why > this should be done or why multiple packages are bad. No, you are refusing to hear them. 1) most, if not all other packages work like that. When people introduce initng, if it will happen at all in the future, then that's a good time to redo this package along with the hundreds of other packages 2) you are insisting on custom non-FE requirements 3) your requires are custom and don't take into account the regular FE base install (that includes lvm2 etc, you call bloat) 4) spec file is overly complex (and a reason people are not approving it) 5) You are blowing up a simple package into many subpackages which is completely unneccessary on a FC/FE machine (versus your development box where you need it) I guess the FE new package submission needs a way to DISapprove a package so these deadlocks do not occur. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 08:24 EST --- (In reply to comment #46) > - Your refusal to collaborate with reviewers is hurting Fedora. You're > essentially blackballing a number of useful packages from entering Fedora, > since > you're holding a temporary monopoly on those particular package reviews. That's the rule of the game. Maybe it could be changed, but I don't think this example call for that change. It is not a refusal to cooperate, but a disagreement. I haven't looked deeply at this, but I tend to think that both approaches are valid (split and unsplit) each with pros and cons. The dependencies are better isolated with Enrico approach while it is simpler and more generic unsplit. > The fact that the entire community doens't support your splitting proposal, > and > the fact that no other distros does it should *at least* give you a hint that > something is wrong with your reasoning. You can't be serious if you think > you're > right and everyone else is wrong. That's a wrong assumption. The number isn't a proof of correctness. Especially when the people having looked at the issue is only a subset of the community. And given the rules, Enrico needs only to find one reviewer who backs up his view. Anybody disagreeing might then throw the issue on the extras list, but currently 2 people may be against all the other packagers (not that I consider that to be a healthy situation). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 07:11 EST --- (In reply to comment #46) > - Enrico, nobody is doubting your technical expertise, but I just think your > reasoning doesn't fall within the scope of what Fedora is. Fedora is not a > distro targetted at the embedded world, and mock seems to work pretty well is > it > now, so I don't understand the quest for the smallest system possible. Given that Fedora is heavily involved in the OLPC project, I suspect that bloated dependency chains are likely to become more of an issue and get more attention in the FC7 timeframe. Enrico is a little "ahead of the game" here but I can see the approach of splitting packages up to fine-tune dependencies becoming more common in the near future. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 06:31 EST --- > Reviewers want the one-package structure but do not give a single > argument why this should be done or why multiple packages are bad. Sure, let's give it a shot. - We've never had a policy for systematically splitting packages strictly based on a couple of fairly common packages. The policy is mostly based on common-sense, i.e. when the subpackage has a real dependency bloat issue such as bringing in the entire java stack, or gstreamer, or 25 perl packages. - If we were to use your strict splitting policy on all Fedora packages, the total number of packages in Fedora would be multiplied by 3 or 4. There's an inherent cost associated with increasing the number of packages at the yum/rpm level. Yum is improving all the time but it has enough work to do as it is. - Simplicity. Keep It Simple. I'm looking at the tor tarball, and it's dreadfully simple. No complicated dependencies, very small number of installed files. Not even 2M in size. So the complexity you're introducing in the spec file doesn't match the complexity of the upstream project. - Consistency to me is an important issue. Consistency across Fedora for one. To use more or less similar guidelines for packages split. Consistency across other distributions for second. - Your refusal to collaborate with reviewers is hurting Fedora. You're essentially blackballing a number of useful packages from entering Fedora, since you're holding a temporary monopoly on those particular package reviews. - Enrico, nobody is doubting your technical expertise, but I just think your reasoning doesn't fall within the scope of what Fedora is. Fedora is not a distro targetted at the embedded world, and mock seems to work pretty well is it now, so I don't understand the quest for the smallest system possible. The SysV init is the default and only init system available right now, so isolating that dependency right now doesn't make sense. Especially since we'll end up with a subpackage containing a single 1.8 Kbytes shell script. The fact that the entire community doens't support your splitting proposal, and the fact that no other distros does it should *at least* give you a hint that something is wrong with your reasoning. You can't be serious if you think you're right and everyone else is wrong. So please, either - fold the package into one, so I can review it and let's get this over with - close this bug and withdraw your review to give someone else the opportunity to submit it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 16:36 EST --- Reviewers want the one-package structure but do not give a single argument why this should be done or why multiple packages are bad. I gave arguments why I chose the multi-package structure and nobody responded to these arguments so far. > initng ... I still don't see it in the upcoming FC6 initng is an Extras candidate and can be added after FC6 release > ... package that are considered 'always present', such as lvm2 ... ok; this might be a response to my arguments. But I do not think that this is a valid one. 'lvm2' is always present due to packaging bugs only (mixed initscripts and core-functionality; bloated 'initscripts' package). I can not fix the other packages because I would have to make this discussion at lot of other packages. RH developers are usually ignorant regarding dependency issues (e.g. look at aspell -> perl dep, sendmail -> cyrus-sasl, initscripts -> low-level stuff) so this would be a lost battle at least in Core. What I can do, is to package my packages properly and to separate core-functionality and unneeded/big dependencies which is giving users with e.g. chroots or non-SysV init a chance for a small system. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 15:10 EST --- As for "requesting your will", not a single person but you is insisting on not having tor included without different init methods. I only see people who either want tor in and don't care, or people who are negative about the split. If we would be doing a concensus here, it would be to have a single tor package in FE now, and in the future when initng IS in FE to do the split. Furthermore, you expected initng to get here soonbut reality is, I still don't see it in the upcoming FC6 (as shown in 5.92). Are we going to wait having a tor package until FC7? It is you who does not want to depend on package that are considered 'always present', such as lvm2, thereby adding non fedora-extra issues to this package. Let's not drag the tsocks argument into this. One can trivially grab http://dag.wieers.com/packages/tsocks/ and put in in FE. I'll gladly either propose it or approve it if this tsocks issue is considered a tor blocker. The sub package issue is the only real issue here. It caused this package to not be approved on 2005-12-22 and 10 months later is still blocking it. That's why I think this should be discussed. This package either needs to get approved with the subpackage structure, or should be declined in favour of another packager. It should not remain in political limbo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 13:46 EST --- I do not think that it is deadlocked; 'initng' is probably going soon into FE (AMD64 issues were main blocker and packager has AMD64 machine now), so we have the multi-initsystem soon. It would be good too, when reviewers do not insist on personal views and *requesting* their will. Statements like "others are doing it so" are valid comments, but without reasons they are just comments, and not a blocker. And yes; it makes sense to package tor without tsocks support. Even when tsocks would be available, the corresponding tor-wrapper must be in an own subpackage due to the additional dependencies. The 'tsocks' wrapper might be a nice feature but not required so it can be ommitted for now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 13:44 EST --- I would prefer having tsocks and torify in Extras. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 13:19 EST --- One more question: does it make sense to package tor without the torify wrapper script ? (which requires tsocks, http://tsocks.sourceforge.net/, which we don't have). Wouldn't it make sense to first submit tsocks in a seperate review, THEN submit tor when that's available ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 13:00 EST --- It seems this package is dead locked, and no one wants to approve this package due to the separate sub packages. I submitted a package, which had the approval of the tor developers upstream, but it was submitted a day after this package, so was resolved as duplicate. This issue should be discussed on the fedora-extras list and resolved one way or another. The result of the current deadlock is that there is no tor pacakge whatsoever in Fedora, which is not right. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 08:18 EST --- I will merge packages when you show me that tor requires lvm2, udev or e2fsprogs. Else, I see at me own systems that 'tor' works perfectly without them so I assume they are optional. The '-tsocks' subpackage won't be built be default; when you really want it, I can remove any traces of it out of the spec-file. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |NEW Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 07:53 EST --- Sorry, closing the bug was accidental. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 07:52 EST --- Hmm, this seems overkill, especially since lvm2, udev and e2fsprogs are pretty basic packages. Tor is a pretty small and simple package to start with. All other distributions ship it as a single package, including the RHEL43 packages directly provided by upstream. Also, torify requires tsocks which is not currently available. Were you planning to submit tsocks as well ? If not, we need to close this bug with a WONTFIX or DEFERRED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 07:08 EST --- no; the part which requires lvm2, udev or e2fsprogs will be always in another (sub)package than the tor-server which works perfectly without them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 06:14 EST --- I would like to see tor make it into Fedora Extras, and this being one of the oldest review in bugzilla I would like to review this and get it over with. Is there anyway you would agree to simplify your spec file, merge the core and lsb subpackages into the main one and remove the other subpackages that aren't directly relevent to Fedora (at this point). I would recommend a simpler approach for now, to speed up the review, and add support for newer init-replacement only when they make it into FE. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-10 14:50 EST --- sorry, comments where made with the wrong package in mind... So, please remove the third paragraph -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-10 14:44 EST --- > I guess I don't see the point in splitting what's certainly going to > be required out to a subpackage. ok; package was written when it seemed that 'initng' could replace 'initscripts' in near future. But current development and codebaes shows that they are still in the experimenting phase (e.g. they try crazy things like garbage collector in init). But: I do not see a reason why 'distcc' needs lvm2, udev or e2fsprogs (which would be the case when SysV initscript would be in the main package). So I will keep core functionality and initscripts in separate packages. Things are special for this package because it supports startup with SysV, inetd and ssh. > Is there any existing daemon that has its initscripts in a subpackage? ip-sentinel, dhcp-forwarder, milter-greylist -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-30 02:08 EST --- I took a look at this package, but I find myself questioning the point behind the lsb, minit and initng subpackages. We have a defined system in Fedora for initscripts and such; I guess I don't see the point in splitting what's certainly going to be required out to a subpackage. Is there any existing daemon that has its initscripts in a subpackage? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-13 12:23 EST --- * Sun Aug 13 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.23-0 - updated to 0.1.1.23 http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163776 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-25 15:42 EST --- Sorry for sitting on this review for so long... I am going to set this back to FE_NEW and see if someone else would like to move it forward. (I thought I did this a while back, but it fell through the cracks. Sorry). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-08 05:38 EST --- regarding comment #22 (sorry, I forget it) -- > >- renamed the current main-package into a '-core' subpackage and > > created a new main-package which requires both the 'tor-core' > > subpackage and this with the current default init-method. This > > allows 'yum install tor' to work better; because yum is not very > > smart, the old packaging might install unwanted packages else. > > Humm.. Can you elobrate on what situation would result in unwanted > packages? We had the following situation with the old packaging: | Name: tor | Requires: init(tor) | | %package lsb | Provides: init(tor) = lsb | Requires: lsb | | %package initng | Provides: init(tor) = initng | Requires: initng Assuming you have a minimal system with the 'initng' initsystem but without 'tor' packages. Now When you install 'tor' now, two possibilities exist for the resulting package combination : * 'tor' + 'tor-initng'; this is the probably wanted result and will not bring unwanted packages in * 'tor' + 'tor-lsb'; this will install 'tor-lsb' (which will not work with the initng system) with its huge dependency chain. This option is probably unwanted. yum has a lousy depsolver and will use the second, unwanted option due to the shortest-packagename-wins rule. Therefore, I moved 'tor' into the -core subpackage and made 'tor' a metapackage requiring 'tor-core' plus the subpackage for the current initsystem. This might be tor-lsb for FC4-FC6 and tor-initng for FC7. This eases package installation for people with standard installation doing | # yum install tor and those with initng who can do | # yum install tor-core tor-initng -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-08 05:21 EST --- * Sat Jul 08 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.22-0 - updated to 0.1.1.22 http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/ http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/tor.spec http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/tor-0.1.1.22-0.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-28 02:11 EST --- [lost in the last bugzilla crash] * Tue Jun 13 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.21-0 - updated to 0.1.1.21 http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/ http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/tor.spec http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/tor-0.1.1.21-0.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-23 19:30 EST --- * Wed May 24 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.20-0 - updated to 0.1.1.20; adjusted %doc file-list - added (optional) -tsocks subpackage - use the more modern %bcond_with* for specifying optional features --- 'tsocks' requirement will be brought in by the -tsocks subpackage. Because it is not available in FE, it is disabled by default. fwiw; initng is making big steps to become part of FE so we will have an alternative init system soon. When there are still objections against the -lsb, -initng, ... subpackages, I will hold this package until 'initng' is really available for FE and we have something to discuss about. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-23 19:30 EST --- * Wed May 24 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.20-0 - updated to 0.1.1.20; adjusted %doc file-list - added (optional) -tsocks subpackage - use the more modern %bcond_with* for specifying optional features --- 'tsocks' requirement will be brought in by the -tsocks subpackage. Because it is not available in FE, it is disabled by default. fwiw; initng is making big steps to become part of FE so we will have an alternative init system soon. When there are still objections against the -lsb, -initng, ... subpackages, I will hold this package until 'initng' is really available for FE and we have something to discuss about. --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-13 02:05 EST --- * Tue Jun 13 2006 Enrico Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.1.1.21-0 - updated to 0.1.1.21 http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/ http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/tor.spec http://ensc.de/fedora/tor/tor-0.1.1.21-0.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-23 16:42 EST --- After installating the RPM resulting from comment #21, "torify" will fail with the following error message: /usr/bin/torify: line 7: exec: tsocks: not found You probably need a Requires: on tsocks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
