From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Kost Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add darkhttpd. Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 20:44:43 +0300 Message-ID: <87bmzv3b04.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20160909204158.GA4337@jasmine> <20160910065157.5289-1-arunisaac@systemreboot.net> <87oa3wtekf.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54255) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bimKj-0004cn-9k for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 13:44:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bimKd-0002ze-B3 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 13:44:52 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-x244.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::244]:33890) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bimKd-0002yp-32 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 13:44:47 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-x244.google.com with SMTP id k12so3999611lfb.1 for ; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 10:44:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Arun Isaac's message of "Sat, 10 Sep 2016 18:00:38 +0530") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Arun Isaac Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Arun Isaac (2016-09-10 18:00 +0530) wrote: >> Why 'git-fetch'? There is a release tarball: >> >> https://unix4lyfe.org/darkhttpd/darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2 > > Yes, there is a release tarball. But, there is some server side issue > with the url. When I try to download it with wget, I get a "The server > name sent was not recognized" warning. wget ignores this warning and > moves on. The guix downloader fails completely. Should the guix > downloader be patched to ignore this warning as well? Oh, indeed (sorry, I didn't try to do "guix download"). Actually I don't even know whether this problem can be fixed on the guix side (since the error comes from gnutls). [...] > I have initiated a conversation about this problem with the darkhttpd > developer. But, he has no idea what the problem might be. I'll have to > do some research on the Internet. Any ideas? Sorry, no ideas. All this TLS stuff is a complete mistery for me, I hope a more knowledgeable person will comment on this. > If you insist on a tarball instead of the git repo, we can add this > package after this tarball download url problem is fixed. No, no, I don't insist; this problem shouldn't block packaging, git-fetch will be OK, but I think there should be a comment explaining why the tarball is not used. -- Alex