[VETO] GPG and EFS lossage in package update description
jschrod at acm.org
Thu Feb 3 18:01:08 EST 2005
>>>>> "MS" == Michael Sperber <sperber at informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:
[F'up from xemacs-patches, that discussion shouldn't be there, should it?]
>>>>> "Joachim" == Joachim Schrod <jschrod at acm.org> writes:
Joachim> Mike, is it possible to say something like `do first <a>; if you still
Joachim> get EFS erros, try <b>; else try <c>'; where my proposal would just be
Joachim> <a> or <b>? Maybe <c> is `fetch and install an EFS update manually'?
Joachim> Well, now that I think about it; maybe manual fetch and install is the
Joachim> only realistic workaround.
MS> Yes. Alternatively, is there an XEmacs mirror that doesn't have the
MS> new RFC stuff in it? That would really be the simplest alternative.
Yes, there are some mirrors without EPSV support. They are an even
bigger problem; AFAICT they cannot be used at all with ftp clients
that send EPSV as first.
I re-installed the old efs 1.32 (upstream v1.22) and did some tests,
e.g., with ftp.ca.xemacs.org who does not support Extended Passive
Mode. This server answers with `500 Unknown command.' and EFS (and
thus the package index update) stumbles over that.
This is also true for the current efs (1.33, upstream v1.23). I.e.,
ftp.ca.xemacs.org and others are not usable without configuration for
package updates on Linux (at least, not on those where Luke Mewburn's
NetBSD ftp client is used) and probably also not on BSD. Is this
For these sites to work, one must add "-A" to the ftp args *and* one
must update the package index twice, there is no other possibility.
During the first update, the ftp server will answer with `500 Unknown
command' first when the EPRT command is used. The ftp client will stop
using extended ftp commands then, and use standard PASV/PORT commands
the second time. For this to work from the start, EFS would need to
issue the command epsv4 to the ftp client. (Most probably, where
lukemftp is used, one needs to add "-A" always; otherwise one gets the
inconsistency that Mike already mentioned.)
In summary, the situation is a mess. There is no workaround that can
be easily described and that will really work. I will now update my
Web Site patch as follows:
-- I will recommend to fetch and install efs manually in case of
`Extended Passive Mode' errors.
-- I will recommend to switch mirrors in case of `Unknown command' or
any other 500 errors.
I hope that we can agree on these changes.
PS: Is Steve Youngs still the maintainer of package-get.el? If yes,
and if he reads this: Would you accept patches that package index and
package files are fetched via HTTP? This would probably also help some
people who have to use proxies.
Joachim The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the
Rödermark, Germany one that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!"
<jschrod at acm.org> (I found it!) but "That's funny..." [Isaac Asimov]
More information about the XEmacs-Beta