On Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:47:58 +0100, Luca Ferrari
wrote:
Why don't you notify the author of phttpget and ask for a bugfix?
I'd love to see a bugfix for this issue, you are right I would have
been asked the author first
However I'm wondering why portsnap uses phttpget instead of fetch,
th
> Why don't you notify the author of phttpget and ask for a bugfix?
I'd love to see a bugfix for this issue, you are right I would have
been asked the author first
However I'm wondering why portsnap uses phttpget instead of fetch,
that is available in base.
Luca
__
On Fri, 30 Nov 2012 08:36:07 +0100, Luca Ferrari
wrote:
I also tried using HTTP_PROXY and HTTP_PROXY_AUTH and it did not work,
or maybe I don't get how to configure them:
HTTP_PROXY=host:port
HTTP_PROXY_AUTH=base:user:pass
and either
HTTP_PROXY=http://host:port
HTTP_PROXY_AUTH=base:user:pa
On 30/11/2012 07:36, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> I also tried using HTTP_PROXY and HTTP_PROXY_AUTH and it did not work,
> or maybe I don't get how to configure them:
>
> HTTP_PROXY=host:port
> HTTP_PROXY_AUTH=base:user:pass
>
> and either
>
> HTTP_PROXY=http://host:port
> HTTP_PROXY_AUTH=base:user:pass
>
I also tried using HTTP_PROXY and HTTP_PROXY_AUTH and it did not work,
or maybe I don't get how to configure them:
HTTP_PROXY=host:port
HTTP_PROXY_AUTH=base:user:pass
and either
HTTP_PROXY=http://host:port
HTTP_PROXY_AUTH=base:user:pass
In both cases however the error message is different: now
Am Thu, 29 Nov 2012 14:13:43 +
schrieb Vincent Hoffman :
> On 29/11/2012 14:08, Devin Teske wrote:
> > What…
> >
> > env http_proxy=user:pass@server:port fetch ...
> >
> > doesn't work for you?
> I think he means that setting
> env http_proxy=user:pass@server:port portsnap fetch
>
> doent wor
On 29/11/2012 14:08, Devin Teske wrote:
> What…
>
> env http_proxy=user:pass@server:port fetch ...
>
> doesn't work for you?
I think he means that setting
env http_proxy=user:pass@server:port portsnap fetch
doent work and that
setting
HTTP_PROXY=server:port
HTTP_PROXY_AUTH=basic:user:pass
then ru
What…
env http_proxy=user:pass@server:port fetch ...
doesn't work for you?
--
Devin
On Nov 29, 2012, at 5:50 AM, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Vincent Hoffman wrote:
>> Have you tried using
>> HTTP_PROXY_AUTH variable as per fetch(3) instead?
>> added in
>> http://svn
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Vincent Hoffman wrote:
> Have you tried using
> HTTP_PROXY_AUTH variable as per fetch(3) instead?
> added in
> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/usr.sbin/portsnap/phttpget/phttpget.c?revision=150461&view=markup
Does not work for me, and looking at the source co
On 28/11/2012 08:52, Luca Ferrari wrote:
>> Certainly not with a dependency on wget, which is not part of the base
>> system. Use fetch instead.
>>
> Right, so I'm wondering why not using fetch instead of phttpget by default.
> However I've rewritten everything so that now it allows for the
> confi
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 09:52:57 +0100, Luca Ferrari
wrote:
Certainly not with a dependency on wget, which is not part of the base
system. Use fetch instead.
Right, so I'm wondering why not using fetch instead of phttpget by
default.
Phttpget is more efficient because it uses http pipelini
> Certainly not with a dependency on wget, which is not part of the base
> system. Use fetch instead.
>
Right, so I'm wondering why not using fetch instead of phttpget by default.
However I've rewritten everything so that now it allows for the
configuration of fetch or not. The only change is that
On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 08:52 +0100, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> Now the question is: should this patch, or better the idea of using
> wget or another alike substitute to phttpget, be integrated into the
> system?
> I've tested it on FreeBSD-9-STABLE.
Certainly not with a dependency on wget, which is not
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> I did a little review and now it is possible to specify to use wget or
> not using the portsnap.conf file, as well as the option to ingore
> certificate checking even if I don't believe this is correct.
> Therefore portsnap with this patch co
I did a little review and now it is possible to specify to use wget or
not using the portsnap.conf file, as well as the option to ingore
certificate checking even if I don't believe this is correct.
Therefore portsnap with this patch could work with either wget or
phttpget, even if I'm not able to
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:22:09AM +0200, Alexander Yerenkow wrote:
> Do you aware that if wget tries download from https, and there is
> self-signed certificate, then it fails, and ask for --no-check-certificate
> option?
> How do your patch deal in that case?
>
> 2012/11/27 Luca Ferrari
>
> >
Sorry, back to list.
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Alexander Yerenkow wrote:
> Do you aware that if wget tries download from https, and there is
> self-signed certificate, then it fails, and ask for --no-check-certificate
> option?
> How do your patch deal in that case?
It simply does not. A
Am Tue, 27 Nov 2012 10:22:09 +0200
schrieb Alexander Yerenkow :
> Do you aware that if wget tries download from https, and there is
> self-signed certificate, then it fails, and ask for
> --no-check-certificate option?
> How do your patch deal in that case?
So portsnap and freebsd-update don't ca
Do you aware that if wget tries download from https, and there is
self-signed certificate, then it fails, and ask for --no-check-certificate
option?
How do your patch deal in that case?
2012/11/27 Luca Ferrari
> Hi all,
> I was in trouble for a while because I was using FreeBSD behind an
> http
Hi all,
I was in trouble for a while because I was using FreeBSD behind an
http proxy (a palo alto for what it means) and the portsnap command
was unable to handle updates reporting always "file does not exist".
After digging I found that the problem was in the phttpget command
used internally from
20 matches
Mail list logo
