From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add darkhttpd. Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 18:00:38 +0530 Message-ID: <cu7vay4djip.fsf@systemreboot.net> References: <20160909204158.GA4337@jasmine> <20160910065157.5289-1-arunisaac@systemreboot.net> <87oa3wtekf.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org> Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40634) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <arunisaac@systemreboot.net>) id 1bihR1-0007PJ-KX for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 08:31:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <arunisaac@systemreboot.net>) id 1bihQx-0005C7-CA for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 08:31:02 -0400 Received: from [117.218.232.8] (port=34752 helo=systemreboot.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <arunisaac@systemreboot.net>) id 1bihQw-0005Bq-QT for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 08:30:59 -0400 In-reply-to: <87oa3wtekf.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." <guix-devel.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>, <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>, <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org> To: Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org > 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? The guix downloader output is shown below. $ guix download https://unix4lyfe.org/darkhttpd/darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2 Starting download of /tmp/guix-file.9jzMRu >From https://unix4lyfe.org/darkhttpd/darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2... ERROR: Throw to key `gnutls-error' with args `(#<gnutls-error-enum A TLS warning alert has been received.> handshake)'. failed to download "/tmp/guix-file.9jzMRu" from "https://unix4lyfe.org/darkhttpd/darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2" guix download: error: https://unix4lyfe.org/darkhttpd/darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2: download failed The wget downloader output is shown below. $ wget https://unix4lyfe.org/darkhttpd/darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2 --2016-09-09 23:58:53-- https://unix4lyfe.org/darkhttpd/darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2 Resolving unix4lyfe.org (unix4lyfe.org)... 64.62.188.248, 2001:470:1:41::403e:bcf8 Connecting to unix4lyfe.org (unix4lyfe.org)|64.62.188.248|:443... connected. GnuTLS: A TLS warning alert has been received. GnuTLS: received alert [112]: The server name sent was not recognized HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 20184 (20K) [application/x-bzip2] Saving to: 'darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2' darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2 100%[===========================================================>] 19.71K 39.6KB/s in 0.5s 2016-09-09 23:58:56 (39.6 KB/s) - 'darkhttpd-1.12.tar.bz2' saved [20184/20184] 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? If you insist on a tarball instead of the git repo, we can add this package after this tarball download url problem is fixed. > I think (file-name (string-append name "-" version "-checkout")) is a > cleaner name for a git checkout directory (but using the tarball is > preferred). > > If a phase succeed, it should return non-false value, while the value of > 'install-file' is unspecified. In such cases we add #t to the end of > the phase. BTW I would shorten that last line by moving "/bin" to the > next one. Sure, I'll make these changes as well.