anonym wrote (25 Feb 2014 18:08:19 GMT) :
>>> UNBLOCK_NETWORK_LOG="$(/usr/local/sbin/tails-unblock-network 2>&1)"
>>> UNBLOCK_NETWORK_RET=$?
>>> if [ "${UNBLOCK_NETWORK_RET}" -ne 0 ]; then
>>>log_error "tails-unblock-network exited with non-zero status and said:
>>> ${UNBLOCK_NETWORK_LOG}"
>>
FTR, I've accordingly marked #6384 as "info needed", and reassigned
to WinterFairy.
___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to
tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum
11/02/14 19:14, winterfa...@riseup.net wrote:
> I believe I have fixed the regression described in ticket #6383. When
> access to Tor's control port was restricted (to prevent GETINFO address),
> Torbutton could no longer do "New Identity". I have created a filtering
> proxy for the control port, t
24/02/14 16:54, Kathleen Brade wrote:
> On 2/20/14, 4:15 PM, anonym wrote:
>> Any ETA on when my patches can be reviewed? ...
>
> Feedback from Mark and myself for:
>0001-Support-packaging-as-a-standalone-XUL-application.patch
> --
> For the Makefile:
> A small issue: Mark and
25/02/14 23:46, Mike Perry wrote:
> Mark Smith:
Another small consideration is that we (TBB developers) will probably
not test Tor Launcher as a standalone XUL application because we will
not be using it that way... so it is possible we will accidentally break
something that is
Mark Smith:
> >>Another small consideration is that we (TBB developers) will probably
> >>not test Tor Launcher as a standalone XUL application because we will
> >>not be using it that way... so it is possible we will accidentally break
> >>something that is needed in that mode. Of course we will
On 2/25/14, 1:24 PM, anonym wrote:
... Do you want them in new commits
(easier to review), or do you want me to rewrite the history by fixing
the old commits (nicer VCS history)?
We prefer nicer/shorter revision history.
Thanks!
-- Kathy
___
tails-d
24/02/14 16:54, Kathleen Brade wrote:
> On 2/20/14, 4:15 PM, anonym wrote:
>> Any ETA on when my patches can be reviewed? ...
>
> Feedback from Mark and myself for: [...]
Thanks for the review!
Before actually fixing any of your concerns I'd to know how you'd like
me to prepare these additional
19/02/14 11:50, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> at some point (next Tails summit?), we'll want to do an assessment of
> Redmine and how we're using it.
>
> One specific issue I've noticed is that some of us haven't learned
> Textile (the markup language used by default in Redmine), and instead
> write
21/02/14 12:13, intrigeri wrote:
> anonym wrote (21 Feb 2014 05:10:08 GMT) :
>>> I'm afraid this won't work very well for drivers that macchanger can't
>>> retrieve the permanent MAC address from, e.g.:
>
>> To be continued after the issue pointed out in the post "Serious issue:
>> fail-safe and h
21/02/14 16:21, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've had a look at the latest tails-greeter changes.
>
> Looks good, but a minor comment:
>
>> UNBLOCK_NETWORK_LOG="$(/usr/local/sbin/tails-unblock-network 2>&1)"
>> UNBLOCK_NETWORK_RET=$?
>> if [ "${UNBLOCK_NETWORK_RET}" -ne 0 ]; then
>>log_error "
21/02/14 20:11, intrigeri wrote:
> I've merged feature/spoof-mac into devel.
Woo! :)
It seems you merged with fast-forwardinging, though. Let's just hope we
won't have to revert the branch.
> The only remaining bits are the end-user documentation revamp, that's
> on sajolida's plate.
sajolida,
Hi,
Alan wrote (25 Feb 2014 15:04:47 GMT) :
> I wonder what would be a good fix to that issue. We could keep on adding
> patterns to the regexp, the that looks like an endless blacklist
> approach. However I fail to see how to take a white-list approach on
> this without killing the whole purpose
Alan wrote (25 Feb 2014 14:00:05 GMT) :
>> > 1. Ship a 64-bit kernel (#5456) in 0.23. I'm committed to lead this
>> > to a conclusion. Assigned to the 0.23's RM (anonym) for review.
>> >
> This will be done, as far as I understood.
Correct.
>> > 3. Workaround the syslinux menu display bugs
Alan wrote (25 Feb 2014 12:02:24 GMT) :
> What about a mechanism to change this value with the Tor
> control{port,socket} ?
Yeah, probably. I suggest we "wait" until the bridge support is
finished, most likely with Tor Launcher, and then we'll have a better
overview of what kind of Tor controllers
On 02/25/2014 08:13 AM, Alan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some time ago, I wrote you about the possibility of updating the lifefra
> backport for wheezy, which would be highly useful for Tails[1].
>
> Do you still think about it?
I don't think 1.10.3 would ever be backported to Wheezy because of
regressions.
Hi,
> > We would like a way for the Authenticated Tor Hidden Service
> > configs to be persistent across reboots.
> > https://github.com/freedomofpress/securedrop/issues/282
>
> No doubt this is a usecase I'd like us to support better.
>
+1
> However, I'm not sure we would want to advertize suc
Hi,
> I don't think we've been doing that so far (eg tails-support,
> tails-l10n, tails-bugs, etc.) but I don't mind starting now.
>
> I'm ok with being admin on that list of course :)
>
> Next step: I'll send a request to r...@boum.org to ask for the list.
> My last interactions with them were
Hi,
> One specific issue I've noticed is that some of us haven't learned
> Textile (the markup language used by default in Redmine), and instead
> write Markdown that Redmine obviously interprets the wrong way.
>
I must admin I didn't really learnt textile, but for me basic plain
text is enough.
> Perhaps even *too* obvious :) ... which makes me think we might be
> missing some important drawbacks of doing so. So, before we make this
> change, I'd like its advocates to research why this is not the case by
> default on Debian (or X, or GNOME, or something).
>
Filed as https://labs.riseup.n
Hi Tails developers,
Whisperback is the application used in Tails to report issues to the
developers. Its reports are encrypted and send via a Tor hidden service
to some trusted members of the Tails team.
If the user doesn't out-out, Whisperback collects information about the
problem such as logs
Hi,
Some time ago, I wrote you about the possibility of updating the lifefra
backport for wheezy, which would be highly useful for Tails[1].
Do you still think about it?
Thanks by advance for your answer.
Cheers
Alan
[1]. https://tails.boum.org/
On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 12:05:05 +
Alan wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 08 Jan 2014 12:29:49 + sajol...@pimienta.org wrote:
> intrigeri:
> > I have written a technical report of my UEFI research, early test
> > results and conclusions: https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/UEFI/
>
> Nice!
>
> > 1. Ship a 64-bit kernel (#5456) in 0.23. I'm committed to le
23 matches
Mail list logo
