~kas

Bornholm, Denmark

https://kas.bio.link/

Fortune favours the lucky

~kas/public-inbox

Last active 2 years ago
View more

Recent activity

Re: Servers refusing connections from Offpunk 4 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> The only hypothesis I have for that kind of behaviour is offpunk
> being considered as a bot/spam/crawler.

How would the site know that? Offpunk doesn't set/send anything like HTTP's User-Agent, does it?

> Any other hypothesis to explain the problem?

I would assume that I had made an error, rather than thinking that the world is against me.

I can see in netcache.py that offpunk does all sorts of things in order to set up a TLS connection. Specifically I see that it attempts to set the ciphers

  "AESGCM+ECDHE:AESGCM+DHE:CHACHA20+ECDHE:CHACHA20+DHE:!DSS:!SHA1:!MD5:@STRENGTH"

Re: Offpunk 2.1 5 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> Just pushed a new annotated tag, should be fine now

Thanks. I bumped the package “epoch” on AUR because the old “g765f8f6-1” > the new “g1bbd317”, so now we're going from “2:2.1.r0.g765f8f6-1” to “3:2.1.r0.g1bbd317-1”.

That should solve it.

Thanks.

-- 
Kʟᴀᴜꜱ Aʟᴇxᴀɴᴅᴇʀ Sᴇɪꜱᴛʀᴜᴘ 🇩🇰
https://magnetic-ink.dk/kas

Re: Offpunk 2.1 5 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> How is it possible? How does it take its value?

It gets the value from the git blockchain. I guess the “amend” thing b0rked something.

Do you get something else when you run “git describe --long” in the repo?

The AUR package is using “git describe” to construct a unique package version for each commit:

🔗 https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/VCS_package_guidelines#Git

Cheers,

Re: Offpunk 2.1 5 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> I amended the commit and forced the push.

Please note that “git describe” now says we have v2.0:

    $ git describe --long --abbrev=7
    v2.0-14-g1bbd317

So the ArchLinux package will seemingly downgrade from v2.1.* to v2.0.*. 

-- 
Kʟᴀᴜꜱ Aʟᴇxᴀɴᴅᴇʀ Sᴇɪꜱᴛʀᴜᴘ 🇩🇰
https://magnetic-ink.dk/kas

Re: Offpunk 2.1 5 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> I always forget this one.

I would, too. :)

> What’s the best way to fix this ? A 2.1.1 release ?

Or you could just be quick and pretend nothing has happened. ;)

Honestly, I don't know how significant these numbers are.

The ArchLinux package will always fetch the latest git commit and calculate a version that uses the tag (that has correctly been set to v2.1) + the commit hash, so any change you make will be accepted.

Re: Offpunk 2.1 5 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> v2.1 - December 15th 2023

Congratulations with the release!

Should the “__version__” variable reflect the release version?

The TOML file references the version and a v2.0 egg will be built. And when installed the *.dist-info directory will have a METADATA file that says

    Metadata-Version: 2.1
    Version: 2.0

Cheers,

Re: Simple packaging fix 6 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> Could confirm that:
> 
> 1) offpunk is working properly

I haven't tried all functionality, but yes I can browse a remote Gemini site.

(I'd prefer if a hostname given without a protocol would just mean gemini://$HOST but that's another story.)

> 2) the other tools are also in the path: netcache, ansicat and opnk ?

```sh
$ pacman --query --list offpunk-git | rg /usr/bin

Re: Simple packaging fix 6 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> So my only question: would it solves the problem for distribution packagers? 
> 
> Is hatchling something "strange" or, for packagers, is it transparent?

On ArchLinux/AUR I just swapped the dependency `python-flit` for `python-hatchling` in PKGBUILD, and for the first time in what seems like months we have a working `offpunk-git` package. 🤸

So a BIG thanks for the change. 🙏

Cheers,

-- 
Kʟᴀᴜꜱ Aʟᴇxᴀɴᴅᴇʀ Sᴇɪꜱᴛʀᴜᴘ 🇩🇰

Re: busybox-style packaging 7 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> As a packager, what’s your opinion on the matter?

The current pyproject.toml will already install an `offpunk` “binary” correctly (it doesn't work at the moment because the other scripts are ignored). It is trivial to add the necessary symlinks during packaging, so the one-script-to-rule-them-all solution gets a YES from me.

PS: That's packaging for ArchLinux.

Cheers,

-- 
Kʟᴀᴜꜱ Aʟᴇxᴀɴᴅᴇʀ Sᴇɪꜱᴛʀᴜᴘ 🇩🇰
https://magnetic-ink.dk/kas

Re: busybox-style packaging 7 months ago

From Klaus Alexander Seistrup to ~lioploum/offpunk-devel

Ploum wrote:

> And, indeed, in Python it is as trivial as doing:
> 
> import sys
> exe = sys.argv[0].split("/")[-1]
> if exe == "ansicat":
> …
> elif exe == "netcache"
> …
> else:
>    main()

If you have many methods you may even use a dictionary. E.g., I have a single script symlinked to 7-9 different names: