Re: StrictNodes or StrictExitNodes?
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:11:55AM +, my.green.lant...@googlemail.com wrote 2.3K bytes in 61 lines about: : So if Tor is using usual development practice then why does the : stable version manual : (http://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-manual.html.en) have : *WarnUnsafeSocks in it if there has been no stable build since it : was introduced in *0.2.2.14-alpha ? This is because the tor-manual.html.en is really the -alpha manual, not the -stable manual. The long story made short is that the new website removed the ability to do man2html on the -stable man page. Oops. I've removed the links to the -stable man page on the website, linking to the -alpha version instead (and labelled as such). : Also , I notice the manuals do not have deprecated commands in it : any more (even if they are still supported). It might be wise to add Because they're in the changelog. The man pages only contain what is supported, not what was supported. -- Andrew pgp key: 31B0974B *** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Re: StrictNodes or StrictExitNodes?
and...@torproject.org wrote: On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:11:55AM +, my.green.lant...@googlemail.com wrote 2.3K bytes in 61 lines about: : So if Tor is using usual development practice then why does the : stable version manual : (http://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-manual.html.en) have : *WarnUnsafeSocks in it if there has been no stable build since it : was introduced in *0.2.2.14-alpha ? This is because the tor-manual.html.en is really the -alpha manual, not the -stable manual. The long story made short is that the new website removed the ability to do man2html on the -stable man page. Oops. I've removed the links to the -stable man page on the website, linking to the -alpha version instead (and labelled as such). I hope this is only a temporary bodge. The new dev (alpha) version commands are NOT in the stable version and WILL keep on causing confusion if this is not resolved. : Also , I notice the manuals do not have deprecated commands in it : any more (even if they are still supported). It might be wise to add Because they're in the changelog. The man pages only contain what is supported, not what was supported. Well the commands are indeed IN the code and still supported and work, so there should be mention of them in the manual (as was done for the past X years now). Why not put them back in the manual and ONLY remove them in future when, 1. They are no longer supported at ALL in the current stable version and 2. when the older versions are no longer compatible (e.g when from time to time we all have to update our older versions due to incompatible code) *** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Re: StrictNodes or StrictExitNodes?
Roger Dingledine wrote: This is interesting. I tried it.. and both seem to work for me on my 0.2.2.10-alpha on win2k. But.. when I tried - WarnUnsafeSocks 0 I get.. Nov 25 17:50:03.015 [Warning] Failed to parse/validate config: Unknown option 'WarnUnsafeSocks'. Failing. Nov 25 17:50:03.015 [Error] Reading config failed--see warnings above. Tor then bombs out.. WarnUnsafeSocks was introduced in Tor 0.2.2.14-alpha. --Roger *** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/ Wow, there seems to be some sort of error, I thought (as per usual development practice) that as The current stable version of Tor is 0.2.1.27. then my 0.2.2.10-alpha would contain the code up to and after 0.2.1.27-stable (had 0.2.1.27-alpha been stable enough - as its normal development practice for a stable to be a stable, a field tested, alpha build - with the same version number). So if Tor is using usual development practice then why does the stable version manual (http://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-manual.html.en) have *WarnUnsafeSocks in it if there has been no stable build since it was introduced in *0.2.2.14-alpha ? Also , I notice the manuals do not have deprecated commands in it any more (even if they are still supported). It might be wise to add these old commands particularly if they are still supported and give versions when they were deprecated/removed and versions when new ones were introduced. It shouldn't be too onerous. After all the manuals are going to be used by people who have different versions. It would then be possible to have just one manual covering ALL Tor versions, stable and dev. e.g. StrictExitNodes 0|1 (Added v?.?.?.?-alpha and v?.?.?.?-stable, Deprecated v0.2.2.7-alpha and v?.?.?.?-stable, Removed v0.?.?.?-alpha etc - see replacement command StrictNodes) Blah.. blah .. blah Then we only have to check the ONE manual and all will be clear! *** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Re: StrictNodes or StrictExitNodes?
Matthew wrote: I think I am correct to say that StrictExitNodes has been negated in favour of StrictNodes. However, when I use StrictExitNodes 1 I have no problems. When I use StrictNodes 1 and have viable ExitNodes then Vidalia gives the error: Vidalia detected that the Tor software exited unexpectedly. I am using 0.2.1.26 on Ubuntu 10.04. Thanks. This is interesting. I tried it.. and both seem to work for me on my 0.2.2.10-alpha on win2k. But.. when I tried - WarnUnsafeSocks 0 I get.. Nov 25 17:50:03.015 [Warning] Failed to parse/validate config: Unknown option 'WarnUnsafeSocks'. Failing. Nov 25 17:50:03.015 [Error] Reading config failed--see warnings above. Tor then bombs out.. *** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Re: StrictNodes or StrictExitNodes?
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 05:52:36PM +, Anon Mus wrote: Matthew wrote: I think I am correct to say that StrictExitNodes has been negated in favour of StrictNodes. However, when I use StrictExitNodes 1 I have no problems. When I use StrictNodes 1 and have viable ExitNodes then Vidalia gives the error: Vidalia detected that the Tor software exited unexpectedly. I am using 0.2.1.26 on Ubuntu 10.04. When Vidalia tells you Tor exited, you should go to Vidalia's message window and learn what Tor said as it exited. In this case I'd guess it's because Tor 0.2.1.26 does not know the 'StrictNodes' config option. It was introduced in Tor 0.2.2.7-alpha. This is interesting. I tried it.. and both seem to work for me on my 0.2.2.10-alpha on win2k. But.. when I tried - WarnUnsafeSocks 0 I get.. Nov 25 17:50:03.015 [Warning] Failed to parse/validate config: Unknown option 'WarnUnsafeSocks'. Failing. Nov 25 17:50:03.015 [Error] Reading config failed--see warnings above. Tor then bombs out.. WarnUnsafeSocks was introduced in Tor 0.2.2.14-alpha. --Roger *** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
StrictNodes or StrictExitNodes?
I think I am correct to say that StrictExitNodes has been negated in favour of StrictNodes. However, when I use StrictExitNodes 1 I have no problems. When I use StrictNodes 1 and have viable ExitNodes then Vidalia gives the error: Vidalia detected that the Tor software exited unexpectedly. I am using 0.2.1.26 on Ubuntu 10.04. Thanks.
