From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#50507: New function in Emacs GnuTLS implementation Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 18:52:16 +0300 Message-ID: <83ee9vgle7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83ee9wiozc.fsf@gnu.org> <83fsubgm7s.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="24947"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 50507@debbugs.gnu.org To: nchatz314@gmail.com Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 11 17:53:15 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5Jb-0006MO-18 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 17:53:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51154 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5JZ-0007SV-8N for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 11:53:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49140) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5JO-0007SJ-BM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 11:53:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57939) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5JN-0004TT-UG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 11:53:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5JN-0005gx-PC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 11:53:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 15:53:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50507 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 50507-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B50507.163137555821842 (code B ref 50507); Sat, 11 Sep 2021 15:53:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 50507) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Sep 2021 15:52:38 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41252 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5Iz-0005gE-Na for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 11:52:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60252) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5Iy-0005fz-5W for 50507@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 11:52:36 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:35910) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5Is-00043b-Ma; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 11:52:30 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3649 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mP5Is-0006Ef-6g; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 11:52:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <83fsubgm7s.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Sat, 11 Sep 2021 18:34:31 +0300) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:214088 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 18:34:31 +0300 > From: Eli Zaretskii > Cc: 50507@debbugs.gnu.org > > > Versions after 3.2 and 3.1.11 include them. Although it appears > > straightforward to introduce them, my plan is to spend some time > > acclimating myself with GnuTLS and the Emacs implementation to ensure > > that I did it right, and then I'll submit a patch. Does it sound good? > > Yes, SGTM. Thank you very much for working on this. And, of course, don't hesitate to ask questions if something in the existing implementation is unclear.