On Dec 7, 2012, at 2:40 AM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2012-12-05 at 23:32 -0500, David Shaw wrote:
>> It's working, it's just misleading since the SRV replacement happens
>> after the debug logging so the actual URL that is hit is not the one
>> that is being logged. If you look at netstat, you c
On 2012-12-05 at 23:32 -0500, David Shaw wrote:
> It's working, it's just misleading since the SRV replacement happens
> after the debug logging so the actual URL that is hit is not the one
> that is being logged. If you look at netstat, you can see it's
> connecting to the right port.
Sorry for
On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:00 AM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2012-12-02 at 23:46 -0500, David Shaw wrote:
>> Hmm. Were you intending to test with the internal HTTP support or
>> with libcurl? You're currently built with internal support:
>
> Ah. I couldn't tell, since the helper binaries are installe
On 2012-12-02 at 23:46 -0500, David Shaw wrote:
> Hmm. Were you intending to test with the internal HTTP support or
> with libcurl? You're currently built with internal support:
Ah. I couldn't tell, since the helper binaries are installed and
nothing explicitly said so. I used whatever FreeBSD
On 2012-12-02 at 10:23 -0500, David Shaw wrote:
> On Oct 6, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> > GnuPG folks (since this is cross-posted, if my mail makes it through):
> >
> > there is a bug in GnuPG's SRV handling, I've identified where I think
> > it is, it's in the second block of text f
On 2012-12-02 at 23:46 -0500, David Shaw wrote:
> I tried talking to keytest.spodhuis.org to test, but all the ports
> returned in the SRV were not listening. Or at least, not listening to
> me ;)
*blush*
Fixed, sorry.
-Phil
___
Gnupg-users mailing l
On Dec 2, 2012, at 7:59 PM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2012-12-02 at 10:23 -0500, David Shaw wrote:
>> On Oct 6, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Phil Pennock
>> wrote:
>>> GnuPG folks (since this is cross-posted, if my mail makes it through):
>>>
>>> there is a bug in GnuPG's SRV handling, I've identified wh
On Oct 6, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> GnuPG folks (since this is cross-posted, if my mail makes it through):
>
> there is a bug in GnuPG's SRV handling, I've identified where I think
> it is, it's in the second block of text from me; the first part of this
> mail relates to SKS and
On 2012-10-06 at 22:20 -0400, Phil Pennock wrote:
> So, there's a `port` and an `opt->port`; the SRV lookups set `opt->port`
> but not `port`, while the URL given to curl uses `port`.
>
> It seems like changing 537 to:
> port = opt->port = newport
>
> should fix it as a stop-gap.
bugs.g10code.
GnuPG folks (since this is cross-posted, if my mail makes it through):
there is a bug in GnuPG's SRV handling, I've identified where I think
it is, it's in the second block of text from me; the first part of this
mail relates to SKS and some policy issues around the new keyserver
pool Kristian
10 matches
Mail list logo
