Re: [BUG] gmime-3.0.1 (was: [PATCH] crypto: gracefully handle gmime errors)
David Bremner writes: > There is code involved with configuring gmime-2.6, which nonetheless > does not involve calling gpg itself. As for notmuch-crypto.el, yes it's > true that the emacs client sometimes does some stuff directly with gpg, > but that has nothing to do with gmime. That's what I wanted to hear. Thank you! (And another thanks for the patience.) Cheers, Jan ___ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Re: [BUG] gmime-3.0.1 (was: [PATCH] crypto: gracefully handle gmime errors)
Jan Malakhovski writes: > > Why then at the very least > > - crypto.c > - notmuch-config.c > - emacs/notmuch-crypto.el > > files refer to "gpg" in the source with lines like > > params.crypto.gpgpath = notmuch_config_get_crypto_gpg_path (config); > notmuch_config_set_crypto_gpg_path (config, "gpg"); > gpgctx = g_mime_gpg_context_new (NULL, crypto->gpgpath ? crypto->gpgpath > : "gpg") There is code involved with configuring gmime-2.6, which nonetheless does not involve calling gpg itself. As for notmuch-crypto.el, yes it's true that the emacs client sometimes does some stuff directly with gpg, but that has nothing to do with gmime. d ___ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Re: [BUG] gmime-3.0.1 (was: [PATCH] crypto: gracefully handle gmime errors)
Servilio Afre Puentes writes: > On Tue, Sep 05 2017, Jan Malakhovski wrote: > > [...] >> I added `gpgme` to `buildInputs` of `gmime` and now `notmuch` passes all >> the tests. Yay! So that was the root problem. >> >> Is it correct to assume that when building with `gmime-3` `notmuch` >> stops calling `gpg` binary and does all the things PGP using `gmime-3`? > > Yes, they use GPGME instead of a custom wrapper: > > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gmime-devel-list/2017-April/msg2.html > > BTW, I created a merge-request to have GMime 3 in Nixpkgs: > > https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/28796 I continued this nix-specific discussion there. ___ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Re: [BUG] gmime-3.0.1 (was: [PATCH] crypto: gracefully handle gmime errors)
David Bremner writes: >> I added `gpgme` to `buildInputs` of `gmime` and now `notmuch` passes all >> the tests. Yay! So that was the root problem. >> >> Is it correct to assume that when building with `gmime-3` `notmuch` >> stops calling `gpg` binary and does all the things PGP using `gmime-3`? >> > > notmuch does not call gpg directly in either case. What changes in the > way gmime calls gpg. In 2.6 gmime called gpg, while in 3.0 it uses gpgme. > It sounds like your gmime-3 package is missing a dependency on gpgme. Why then at the very least - crypto.c - notmuch-config.c - emacs/notmuch-crypto.el files refer to "gpg" in the source with lines like params.crypto.gpgpath = notmuch_config_get_crypto_gpg_path (config); notmuch_config_set_crypto_gpg_path (config, "gpg"); gpgctx = g_mime_gpg_context_new (NULL, crypto->gpgpath ? crypto->gpgpath : "gpg") ___ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Re: [BUG] gmime-3.0.1 (was: [PATCH] crypto: gracefully handle gmime errors)
On Tue, Sep 05 2017, Jan Malakhovski wrote: [...] > I added `gpgme` to `buildInputs` of `gmime` and now `notmuch` passes all > the tests. Yay! So that was the root problem. > > Is it correct to assume that when building with `gmime-3` `notmuch` > stops calling `gpg` binary and does all the things PGP using `gmime-3`? Yes, they use GPGME instead of a custom wrapper: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gmime-devel-list/2017-April/msg2.html BTW, I created a merge-request to have GMime 3 in Nixpkgs: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/28796 Servilio -- Servilio Afre Puentes ___ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Re: [BUG] gmime-3.0.1 (was: [PATCH] crypto: gracefully handle gmime errors)
Jan Malakhovski writes: > I added `gpgme` to `buildInputs` of `gmime` and now `notmuch` passes all > the tests. Yay! So that was the root problem. > > Is it correct to assume that when building with `gmime-3` `notmuch` > stops calling `gpg` binary and does all the things PGP using `gmime-3`? > notmuch does not call gpg directly in either case. What changes in the way gmime calls gpg. In 2.6 gmime called gpg, while in 3.0 it uses gpgme. It sounds like your gmime-3 package is missing a dependency on gpgme. d ___ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Re: [BUG] gmime-3.0.1 (was: [PATCH] crypto: gracefully handle gmime errors)
Hi.
David Bremner writes:
> I'm fairly certain this something nix specific. 3.0.1 is the
> default version of gmime I develop against these days.
>
>> patching sources
>
> What patches, if any are applied here?
None.
>> T350-crypto: Testing PGP/MIME signature verification and decryption
>> PASS emacs delivery of signed message
>> FAIL signature verification
>> --- T350-crypto.2.expected 2017-08-31 14:25:03.126885225 +
>> +++ T350-crypto.2.output2017-08-31 14:25:03.126885225 +
>> @@ -18,13 +18,7 @@
>> ],
>> "content-type": "multipart/signed",
>> "id": 1,
>> -"sigstatus": [
>> -{
>> -"created": 946728000,
>> -"fingerprint":
>> "5AEAB11F5E33DCE875DDB75B6D92612D94E46381",
>> -"status": "good"
>> -}
>> -]
>> +"sigstatus": []
>> }
>> ],
>> "date_relative": "2000-01-01",
>> Failed to verify signed part: Cannot verify multipart/signed part:
>> unregistered signature protocol 'application/pgp-signature'.
>
> It seems like your gmime install doesn't understand PGP/MIME. That's
> pretty strange since afaik it enables SMIME and PGP/MIME with the same flag.
>
> Previously you wrote
> ,
> |I wonder why gnupg stops getting referenced with gmime-3.0.1. My guess
> |is that `./configure` does something very different when compiling with
> |gmime-3.
> `
>
> Although I don't think that configure is really the problem, the missing
> dependence on gnupg is suspicious. Not having a gpg binary at all
> should cause more failures and/or messages about skipping. It's hard for
> me to test because on Debian there is a hard dependency of gmime-3.0 on
> gnupg.
I added `gpgme` to `buildInputs` of `gmime` and now `notmuch` passes all
the tests. Yay! So that was the root problem.
Is it correct to assume that when building with `gmime-3` `notmuch`
stops calling `gpg` binary and does all the things PGP using `gmime-3`?
It's the only explanation I have for why `notmuch` package stops
directly referencing `gpg` even when the sources get patched with
's/gpg/${pkgs.gpg}/bin/gpg/g' (not exactly, but close enough).
Cheers,
Jan
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
Re: [BUG] gmime-3.0.1 (was: [PATCH] crypto: gracefully handle gmime errors)
Jan Malakhovski writes:
> When building with gmime-3.0.1 `tests/T355-smime.sh` passes and messages
> in my inbox get parsed ok, but a lot of other tests break.
>
> Both on 0.25 tag and HEAD get. See attached build log.
>
> building path(s) ‘/nix/store/x7dql3l36nrs84wmzc3jnma71rgdfdfb-notmuch-0.25’
> unpacking sources
> unpacking source archive
> /nix/store/w1kbvfgbi5sz6fp8vwn888yckiwwd24d-notmuch-46bda29
> source root is notmuch-46bda29
I'm fairly certain this something nix specific. 3.0.1 is the
default version of gmime I develop against these days.
> patching sources
What patches, if any are applied here?
> T350-crypto: Testing PGP/MIME signature verification and decryption
> PASS emacs delivery of signed message
> FAIL signature verification
> --- T350-crypto.2.expected 2017-08-31 14:25:03.126885225 +
> +++ T350-crypto.2.output2017-08-31 14:25:03.126885225 +
> @@ -18,13 +18,7 @@
>],
>"content-type": "multipart/signed",
>"id": 1,
> -"sigstatus": [
> -{
> -"created": 946728000,
> -"fingerprint":
> "5AEAB11F5E33DCE875DDB75B6D92612D94E46381",
> -"status": "good"
> -}
> -]
> +"sigstatus": []
>}
>],
>"date_relative": "2000-01-01",
> Failed to verify signed part: Cannot verify multipart/signed part:
> unregistered signature protocol 'application/pgp-signature'.
It seems like your gmime install doesn't understand PGP/MIME. That's
pretty strange since afaik it enables SMIME and PGP/MIME with the same flag.
Previously you wrote
,
|I wonder why gnupg stops getting referenced with gmime-3.0.1. My guess
|is that `./configure` does something very different when compiling with
|gmime-3.
`
Although I don't think that configure is really the problem, the missing
dependence on gnupg is suspicious. Not having a gpg binary at all
should cause more failures and/or messages about skipping. It's hard for
me to test because on Debian there is a hard dependency of gmime-3.0 on
gnupg.
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
