Hi Junichi > > BTW: A somewhat consistent handling of the proxy usage within > > the apt family would not be bad ;-).
> proxy configuration is set in /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/XXX. It should be > consistent with APT. If there really would be a need for a security check (an admin should know what he is doing!) apt-get would be the better place to start with it. It's for sure the higher risk to get packages from the wrong proxy then bug reports. And if there is such a check it should be handled consistently by all programs of the apt family. I would always prefer an apt.conf option to ignore http_proxy environment settings over yet another environment variable. > > But apt-listbugs now reclaims about http_proxy is set and aborts, > > which is not nice: > > > > # apt-listbugs list apt-listbugs > > /usr/sbin/apt-listbugs:395:in `parse_options': E: sanity check failed: > > environment variable http_proxy is set and soap_use_proxy is not 'on'. > > (RuntimeError) > > from /usr/sbin/apt-listbugs:1308 > Why do you set HTTP_PROXY and not http_proxy? This is a safeguard > check against users griping about 'HTTP_PROXY is set but apt-listbugs > does not work' I have set both, not sure which program needed HTTP_PROXY. I'm not even sure if I still need HTTP_PROXY. But the problem was not HTTP_PROXY. The problem was http_proxy, which is set (and needed). > > And .. there are really enough environment variables. We do not need > > yet another environment variable for every program. apt-listbugs has > > a config file, so why not use it for the SOAP_USE_PROXY switch? > > SOAP_USE_PROXY is a safeguard set by ruby upstream. >From the view of the user it does not matter if a program is written in C, perl or ruby. If a program uses a library it should not expose internal interfaces to the user. Regards, Uwe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
