Dear all,
I'm happy to announce that RMS has appointed Martin as co-maintainer for
GNUnet.
Happy hacking!
Christian
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 03:45:47PM +, ng0 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> and thanks for the patch. I guess that the many
> deletes of the packages come from using gnunet package inputs
> now?
> If so, I'll apply it.
>
> Thanks :)
The other packages defined in contrib/guix/gnu/packages/gnunet were
already
Hi,
and thanks for the patch. I guess that the many
deletes of the packages come from using gnunet package inputs
now?
If so, I'll apply it.
Thanks :)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
I was talking to ng0 and they mentioned wanting someone on Guix to test
building gnunet from git. I figured the easiest way was to update gnunet
in Guix and then update the guix.scm file in contrib, so here it is.
--
Efraim Flashner אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA
On 11/27/19 1:07 PM, ng0 wrote:
>> I meant using the dns2gns service/server. Which is documented (?).
>
> Oh, okay. And does nothing depend on the DNS subsystem being able to
> use the gnunet-helper-dns? Ie, are there any implications over
> recommending dns2gns instead for other systems (a soluti
> I meant using the dns2gns service/server. Which is documented (?).
Oh, okay. And does nothing depend on the DNS subsystem being able to
use the gnunet-helper-dns? Ie, are there any implications over
recommending dns2gns instead for other systems (a solution I would
prefer)?
Thanks.
signature.
> On 27. Nov 2019, at 12:54, ng0 wrote:
>
>> Oh, I see. This is still a problem for exit... hmm.
>
> Yes.
>
>>> On 27. Nov 2019, at 12:37, Schanzenbach, Martin
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> my take would be that limiting this functionality to Linux for now is
>>> perfectly fine as there
> Oh, I see. This is still a problem for exit... hmm.
Yes.
>> On 27. Nov 2019, at 12:37, Schanzenbach, Martin
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> my take would be that limiting this functionality to Linux for now is
>> perfectly fine as there are other options (e.g. local DNS server
>> configuration).
Oh, I see. This is still a problem for exit... hmm.
> On 27. Nov 2019, at 12:37, Schanzenbach, Martin
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> my take would be that limiting this functionality to Linux for now is
> perfectly fine as there are other options (e.g. local DNS server
> configuration).
>
> BR
> Marti
Hi,
my take would be that limiting this functionality to Linux for now is
perfectly fine as there are other options (e.g. local DNS server configuration).
BR
Martin
> On 27. Nov 2019, at 12:15, ng0 wrote:
>
> You are right, libpcap does not allow what we require.
>
> I'm still reading into it
You are right, libpcap does not allow what we require.
I'm still reading into it, but can we add a packet filter neutral
(or not using any packet filters at all) version to the requirements
of a stable GNUnet? What I describe below doesn't scale very good.
The two helpers right now require iptabl
11 matches
Mail list logo
