switching marmalade to https

switching marmalade to https

[Nic Ferrier]

So I switched marmalade-repo to HTTPS and forced a redirect for HTTP
users. But Emacs on Windows machines can't use HTTPS.

Should I continue to have marmalade-repo open to HTTP?

Or should I exclude Windows users?

Or is there a hack I can advise Windows users on to get them working
again?



Opinions.


Nic

Re: switching marmalade to https

[Óscar Fuentes]

Nic Ferrier <nferrier@ferrier.me.uk> writes:

> So I switched marmalade-repo to HTTPS and forced a redirect for HTTP
> users. But Emacs on Windows machines can't use HTTPS.

I can browse web sites with eww through the https protocol on Windows.
Maybe the emacs binary of those Windows users was compiled without the
necessary libraries, or the corresponding dlls are not present on the
users machine.

(snip)

Re: switching marmalade to https

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es>
> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 17:19:27 +0200
> 
> Nic Ferrier <nferrier@ferrier.me.uk> writes:
> 
> > So I switched marmalade-repo to HTTPS and forced a redirect for HTTP
> > users. But Emacs on Windows machines can't use HTTPS.
> 
> I can browse web sites with eww through the https protocol on Windows.
> Maybe the emacs binary of those Windows users was compiled without the
> necessary libraries, or the corresponding dlls are not present on the
> users machine.

Indeed, I wonder how did Nic come to that conclusion.  Some details
might shed light on this.

Re: switching marmalade to https

[Nic Ferrier]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Indeed, I wonder how did Nic come to that conclusion.  Some details
> might shed light on this.

I don't have Windows here right now. But a Windows Emacs user reported
on reddit/r/emacs that the new https forcing for marmalade was causing
their package-refresh-contents to fail.

Small tests showed that any https from Windows failed.

I've since found this:

  http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_mono/emacs-gnutls.html

thanks to Steve Purcell.


This seems to describe the problem.

Could we just ship the gnutls dll with the rest of the Emacs W32 port?


Nic

Re: switching marmalade to https

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nic Ferrier <nferrier@ferrier.me.uk>
> Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes
>  <ofv@wanadoo.es>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 17:02:58 +0100
> 
> Could we just ship the gnutls dll with the rest of the Emacs W32 port?

GnuTLS DLLs are available from the site mentioned in README.W32, and
are very easy to install (just unzip a single zip file).

Re: switching marmalade to https

[Nic Ferrier]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> GnuTLS DLLs are available from the site mentioned in README.W32, and
> are very easy to install (just unzip a single zip file).

Windows users already seem challenged. Maybe we could help them out a
bit?

Re: switching marmalade to https

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nic Ferrier <nferrier@ferrier.me.uk>
> Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 17:24:56 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > GnuTLS DLLs are available from the site mentioned in README.W32, and
> > are very easy to install (just unzip a single zip file).
> 
> Windows users already seem challenged. Maybe we could help them out a
> bit?

I think I did, by providing those DLLs in the first place.

Moreover, we currently don't have an "official" set of binaries at
all, so there's no distro to bundle those DLLs with.  When a volunteer
steps forward for this task, we can see how to bundle the optional
DLLs with his/her binaries.

Re: switching marmalade to https

[Nic Ferrier]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Nic Ferrier <nferrier@ferrier.me.uk>
>> Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 17:24:56 +0100
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> > GnuTLS DLLs are available from the site mentioned in README.W32, and
>> > are very easy to install (just unzip a single zip file).
>> 
>> Windows users already seem challenged. Maybe we could help them out a
>> bit?
>
> I think I did, by providing those DLLs in the first place.
>
> Moreover, we currently don't have an "official" set of binaries at
> all, so there's no distro to bundle those DLLs with.  When a volunteer
> steps forward for this task, we can see how to bundle the optional
> DLLs with his/her binaries.

Ok. When I get access to a Windows box I will work out a way to package
binaries.

In the mean time I guess I can just add instructions to Marmalade's
homepage.

Thanks Eli.


Nic