From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7789: cannot send smtpmail using gmail & tls on woe32 Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:45:42 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83y66zmilu.fsf@gnu.org> <87hbdneymc.fsf@gnu.org> <84k4i4x87t.wl%claudio.bley@gmail.com> <84hbd6p6p6.wl%claudio.bley@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1295391312 4819 80.91.229.12 (18 Jan 2011 22:55:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:55:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: claudio.bley@gmail.com (Claudio Bley) Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 18 23:55:08 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKS9-0003qY-Op for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 23:55:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51977 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PfKS9-0004LJ-32 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:55:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52488 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PfKRt-0004F9-Ts for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:54:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKRl-0006bb-3I for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:54:49 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:46285) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKRk-0006bN-SW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:54:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKEX-0004kz-M3; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:41:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:41:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7789 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,w32 X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.129539041818232 (code B ref -1); Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:41:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Jan 2011 22:40:18 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKDq-0004k0-1d for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:40:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKDn-0004jo-RC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:40:16 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKKa-00055Q-4o for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:48:03 -0500 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:40702) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKKa-00055M-2f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:47:16 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=43513 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PfKJs-0000rp-K8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:47:16 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKJ8-0004qp-GQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:46:32 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:58608) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKJ8-0004ql-Ew for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:45:46 -0500 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PfKJ4-0007VC-FD; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:45:42 -0500 In-reply-to: <84hbd6p6p6.wl%claudio.bley@gmail.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:41:01 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:43438 Archived-At: > From: claudio.bley@gmail.com (Claudio Bley) > Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:33:41 +0100 > Cc: > > > > gnutls-cli waits for a SIGALRM to initiate the STARTTLS handshake -- > > > which Emacs isn't able to send -- or, alternatively, an EOF -- which > > > doesn't work because communication is done over a pipe instead of a > > > PTY. > > > > Is this a bug in the ported gnutls, in Emacs, or in both? > > I'd say it's a deficiency of the platform. A port that doesn't take platform deficiencies into consideration is a broken port. I was asking where should the correction be: in gnutls or in Emacs, or in both? > Woe32 has no signal and no PTY support. So, the signal support > has been ifdef'ed out in gnutls and Emacs for Woe32. If it has been ifdefed out, how are users supposed to do on Windows what they do on GNU/Linux by using signals? > > > I'm using cygwin's gnutls-cli and have hacked ssl.el in order to > > > replace the signal-process calls with (call-process "kill.exe" nil nil > > > nil "-ALRM" PID). This works because cygwin provides its own layer of > > > signal handling and is able to send / receive the SIGALRM signal. > > > > How about making that hack part of Emacs? It could be conditioned on > > running on Windows. > > You mean to distribute cygwin's kill.exe with Emacs and just using it > instead of `signal-process' everywhere? Or to depend upon the user to > install a cygwin environment along with Emacs? The latter, and also that hack in ssl.el you need for that. > I'd be a bit reluctant to do that since it seems a bit awkward... Is there a better way that's practical? It is more awkward to ask users to change platforms, or tell them to fix gnutls by themselves, no? > IMHO, it would be better to let the programs work together on all > platforms using different means of notification where necessary, > e.g. using events on windows instead of signals...?! But that would > indeed require an appropriate change on both sides. Exactly. I'm trying to establish whether there's a less painful way, even if it's less elegant. Thanks.