Re: [Tails-dev] Feature #5301 - Clone or Backup Persistent Volume

Andrew Gallagher: > On 07/01/16 19:41, anonym wrote: >> >> I haven't tested it, but I did have a look at src/tcp-helper.c since the >> necessity of memory unsafe code surprised me: > > For the record, I never intended to use C. It was originally written in &

Re: [Tails-dev] Electrum wallet does not connect

Meta: note that this mailing list is for discussions about Tails development, not support; for that we have tails-supp...@boum.org (Cc:ed). For any further posts on this topic, please drop tails-dev@ and continue on tails-support@. Павел О: > I want to ask if I can do something with Electrum. It

Re: [Tails-dev] [Secure Desktops] MAC changer "blend into the crowd" by only using common manufacturer MAC (OUI part) addresses broken by design?

Patrick Schleizer: > Tails' current implementation... > > only spoof the NIC part: yes [1] > OUI part unchanged: yes [2] > > quu9ohch [1]: >> [...] It is not possible to "blend into the crowd" with a > "typical-looking" mac address when so many users allow themselves to be > uniquely

Re: [Tails-dev] [Secure Desktops] Avoiding real MAC address in Tails macchanger being harmful?

[Sorry for the delay :S] Patrick Schleizer: > Tails does verify, that randomly chosen MAC does not equal the real MAC > by chance. > > From tails-spoof-mac [1] (code: [A]) > >> # There is a 1/2^24 chance macchanger will randomly pick the real MAC >> # address. We try to making it really

Re: [Tails-dev] [Secure Desktops] Tails' MAC 'leak prevention' question

[Sorry for the delay :S] Patrick Schleizer: > I understand Tails' MAC 'leak prevention' [1] [2] as this... Without > 'leak prevention', things would happen like this: > > a) > > 1) system boots > 2) kernel module loaded > 3) MAC leaked > 4) macchanger started > 5) MAC changed > 6)

Re: [Tails-dev] [Secure Desktops] Tails: Protect against fingerprinting via active Wi-Fi networks probing implemented?

Patrick Schleizer: > Active probe fingerprinting > https://tails.boum.org/contribute/design/MAC_address/#index6h1 > > says, No - "No protection against this is implemented yet". This is still the case. > but https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/6453 says "yes", 100 % done. That's just Redmine's

[Tails-dev] Post-1.8 Readmine follow-ups

Hi, There are more than 40 tickets still on the 1.8 Target version. Now that Tails 1.8 has been released, please postpone tickets as you see fit. Among the 1.8 tickets there are 5 unassigned tickets:

Re: [Tails-dev] Tails as a Qubes VM

sp...@tutanota.com: > I was trying to get Tails running on Qubes. I used the most recent qubes live > cd and afterwards added tails (1.7) as a HVM virtual machine. It booted > without problems but when the gui wants to start only a blinking icon is > visible and the rest of the screen is black.

Re: [Tails-dev] Prioritize onion servers in Electrum

s7r: > prefnet=tor Instead of introducing this new pref, would it make sense to add a new proxy type, 'tor' or whatever (presented as "Tor Proxy"), that implies socks5 and the behaviour that 'prefnet=tor' otherwise would do? It could even suggest 'localhost:9050' by default. None of this would

Re: [Tails-dev] Release versioning

intrigeri: > Hi, > > intrigeri wrote (18 Aug 2015 11:09:35 GMT) : >> Please do whatever's needed for the change you proposed in our various >> repos + Redmine etc., after leaving some time to others to comment >> further. Perhaps we should make the final decision at the >> September meeting. > >

[Tails-dev] Release schedule for Tails 1.8

Hi, I'll be the release manager for Tails 1.8, which is a minor/stable release scheduled for 2015-12-15. This is the last *planned* Tails release based on Debian Wheezy, so except potential emergency releases, Tails will be based on Debian Jessie after 1.8. :) The list of tickets targeting Tails

Re: [Tails-dev] Updated signing key - lack of notice on d/l page for 1.7

kytv: > On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 09:23:40AM +, Anonymous wrote: >> on your TAILS download page it mentions: >> >> "Tails transitioned to a new signing key in Tails 1.3.1." >> >> But it fails to mention the new updated signing key for 1.7. >> I verified the 1.7 ISO with an older version of TAILS

Re: [Tails-dev] Tor Browser 5.0.4 release -- build5?

Georg Koppen: > Hi, > > we are pondering rebundling for the 5.0.4 release once more to include > the fix for https://bugs.torproject.org/17473. Thanks for the heads up! > As far as I can see Tails is not including meek yet, correct? Thus, your > release plans should not be affected by a

Re: [Tails-dev] Releasing automated tests

sajolida: > anonym: >> sajolida: >>> anonym: >>>> [Moving discussion to tails-dev@] >>> >>> Meta: I really don't want to understand everything that's in this email >>> but I felt you would want me to answer this one. But if you think

Re: [Tails-dev] Windows 10 theme for Tails/Jessie

Christian Medel: > Hi, > > so I tried the Terminal stuff, no result. Maybe I'll have to rewrite some > code for it to work with SHELL. > > About the taskbar I meant a Window-list applet but with just the app icon, > no text. What about this GNOME extension:

Re: [Tails-dev] Releasing automated tests

sajolida: > anonym: >> [Moving discussion to tails-dev@] > > Meta: I really don't want to understand everything that's in this email > but I felt you would want me to answer this one. But if you think that > you can have this discussion without me I would be super happy as

Re: [Tails-dev] Windows 10 theme for Tails/Jessie

Christian Medel: > Wow! what an extension, it looks perfect! > > I'll have a try at it right now. Excellent! > By the way I had a try at applying the theme in the latest TAILS ISO and > this is the result : > > Preview of Windows 10 on TAILS latest testing version > http://imgur.com/a/22nzi >

Re: [Tails-dev] Windows 10 theme for Tails/Jessie

Christian Medel: > Hi, > > I have a question for you. Will you be strictly using GNOME-SHELL or > will the next TAILS include the Cinnamon panel? If that's the case, that > could fix the GNOME-Panel extension and bring the DE look even more than > Windows 10. If it is packaged in Debian and can

Re: [Tails-dev] Releasing automated tests

intrig...@boum.org> > Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 13:08:31 +0200 > >> From: bertagaz <berta...@ptitcanardnoir.org> >> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 12:29:26 +0200 > >>> From: anonym <ano...@riseup.net> >> >>> Still, once we release 1.7, then all doc

Re: [Tails-dev] Desktop Camouflage

intrigeri: > Spencer wrote (21 Oct 2015 07:21:26 GMT) : >> I am checking in on the status of the camouflage feature for Jessie; is >> anybody >> porting it? > > No, nobody has started any porting work. Maybe we are in luck that Windows 10 was released so recently? Generally such releases seems

Re: [Tails-dev] Tails fails to run inside Qubes OS

Patrick Schleizer: > intrigeri: >> If you really tried Tails 1.6, then I suggest you retry with >> a Jessie-based experimental build: >> >> http://nightly.tails.boum.org/build_Tails_ISO_feature-jessie/lastSuccessful/archive/ > > Tried. > > - It's not affected by the X issue. Boots up without

[Tails-dev] Release schedule for Tails 1.7

Hi, I'll be the release manager for Tails 1.7, which is a major release scheduled on 2015-11-03. For the list of tickets targeting Tails 1.7, have a look at: https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=188 As you can see we have a lot left to do this month so I feel forced

Re: [Tails-dev] Testing with openqa?

On 09/15/2015 11:03 AM, intrigeri wrote: > Alan wrote (23 Aug 2015 13:28:41 GMT) : >> but I encourage the people working on the test suite to have a look >> at OpenQA and consider wether it would make sense to use it. It has >> a nice web interface to update screenshots, Sorry for not responding

Re: [Tails-dev] Testing with openqa?

sajolida: >>> Not as if we were taking much benefit from Gherkin for >>> {intra,inter}-team communication yet, but I like it that we're able to; >>> and I intend to try to use Gherkin more in the future when discussing >>> changes with UX folks. >> >> This sounds interesting. I have read some

Re: [Tails-dev] [PATCH] Change syslinux menu entries from "Live" to "Boot"

hilst it >>> does remove the jargon this isn't much better than "Live" IMHO. >> >> anonym: >> I agree with both points. >> > > I don't. User interaction *is* the verb you are looking for :) > > For example, in an application list on any OS ther

Re: [Tails-dev] [Tails-ux] [PATCH] Change syslinux menu entries from "Live" to "Boot"

On 09/11/2015 05:26 PM, Chris Lamb wrote:> Hi, > >> Tails >> Tails (failsafe) > > We really need a verb here as I explain in my original patch. Whilst it > does remove the jargon this isn't much better than "Live" IMHO. I agree with both points. > Did you have any

Re: [Tails-dev] [PATCH] Change syslinux menu entries from "Live" to "Boot"

On 09/09/2015 01:37 AM, Chris Lamb wrote: > Hi, Hi! Thanks for your interest in Tails! > Attached is the following: > > commit 6c331780610f290d495f9c77f16bf7263c4e0f2a > Author: Chris Lamb > Date: Wed Sep 9 00:26:54 2015 +0100 > > Change syslinux menu

Re: [Tails-dev] [PATCH] config/amnesia: use --show-field over sed filtering.

On 09/09/2015 01:37 AM, Chris Lamb wrote: > Hi, Hi! > Attached is the following: > > commit 6c1c6e20ac22c4c15517d7b231fe0dd1714db8e0 > Author: Chris Lamb > Date: Wed Sep 9 00:13:21 2015 +0100 > > config/amnesia: use --show-field over sed filtering.

Re: [Tails-dev] An idea

> - Forwarded Message - > From: tails-b...@boum.org > To: "gil guillot" > Sent: Thursday, 3 September, 2015 11:01:32 AM > Subject: Re: Bug report "laptop on battery" > > > Hi, > >> I had an other idea for another subject : When you click on the >> "shutdown

Re: [Tails-dev] Release schedule for Tails 1.6

On 09/03/2015 10:53 AM, bertagaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:01:04PM +0200, intrigeri wrote: >> >> anonym wrote (27 Aug 2015 14:59:02 GMT) : >>> Ideally I would like *everything* (including testing, most notably) >>> but the steps making t

Re: [Tails-dev] Release schedule for Tails 1.6

On 09/03/2015 01:36 PM, bertagaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 01:03:41PM +0200, anonym wrote: >> >> Yes, the "Go wild!" section only. I will have prepared the body for the >> Tor Blog post an made sure to communicate it to you somehow. I (or >&

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated tests specification

On 09/01/2015 06:57 PM, anonym wrote: > On 09/01/2015 12:04 PM, intrigeri wrote: >> bertagaz wrote (28 Aug 2015 14:24:51 GMT) : >>> and might take quite a bit of disk space to store. >> >> ... and smaller (#10001). I'm curious how much space a full set of >> t

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated tests specification

On 09/02/2015 11:11 AM, anonym wrote: > Failing Scenarios: > cucumber features/time_syncing_bridges.feature:29 # Scenario: Clock way > in the past in bridge mode > cucumber features/time_syncing_bridges.feature:45 # Scenario: Clock way > in the future in bridge mode >

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated tests specification

On 09/02/2015 01:12 PM, intrigeri wrote: > hi, > > anonym wrote (02 Sep 2015 09:11:43 GMT) : >> I got a video that was 309 MiB large [...] > > Assuming (very wild guess) that the size gain brought by the proposed > changes from #10001 can be extrapolated, this could bec

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated tests specification

On 09/01/2015 12:23 PM, intrigeri wrote: > bertagaz wrote (26 Aug 2015 17:52:26 GMT) : >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:38:19PM +0200, anonym wrote: >>> The current proposal seems to be to only start the automated test run of >>> a feature branch when it is marked "Re

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated tests specification

On 09/01/2015 12:04 PM, intrigeri wrote: > Hi, > > bertagaz wrote (28 Aug 2015 14:24:51 GMT) : >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 07:46:17PM +0200, anonym wrote: >> I've also added a new section about the result to keep: > >> ## What kind of result shall be kept > >

[Tails-dev] Release schedule for Tails 1.6

Hi, I'll be the release manager for Tails 1.6, which is a minor release scheduled on 2015-09-22. For the list of tickets targeting Tails 1.6, have a look at: https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=187 Here's the preliminary release schedule: * 2015-09-20: - All

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated tests specification

On 08/26/2015 07:21 PM, bertagaz wrote: On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 02:00:25PM +0200, anonym wrote: On 07/01/2015 07:19 PM, intrigeri wrote: bertagaz wrote (25 Jun 2015 09:41:23 GMT) : for feature branches, we could run the full test suite only on the daily builds, and either only the automated

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated tests specification

On 07/01/2015 07:19 PM, intrigeri wrote: bertagaz wrote (25 Jun 2015 09:41:23 GMT) : for feature branches, we could run the full test suite only on the daily builds, and either only the automated tests related to the branch on every git push, and/or a subset of the whole test suite. I'm not

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated tests specification

On 06/25/2015 11:41 AM, bertagaz wrote: I've prepared a blueprint to start this discussion and take notes of the decisions: https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/automated_builds_and_tests/automated_tests_specs/ Looks great! For the record, I looked at the spec as of commit e70f8e7. # Facts

Re: [Tails-dev] [urgent] Please help: reviewing branches for 1.5

On 08/03/2015 04:45 PM, intrigeri wrote: * #8471 (Support 32-bit UEFI boot) ← that one is a new feature; I would be sad if it didn't make it into 1.5, and it shouldn't be too hard to review; mosty of you will lack the hardware to test it, so you'll have to trust me on the fact that it

Re: [Tails-dev] TAILS build system with Vagrant 1.7.3

On 07/16/2015 02:11 PM, Adam Burns wrote: On 07/15/2015 09:12 PM, anonym wrote: On 07/13/2015 06:32 PM, Adam Burns wrote: [...] You say that the Vagrant/VirtualBox shell provisioning of the base box fails, but the above error is clearly from the Tails build script, not while running

Re: [Tails-dev] TAILS build system with Vagrant 1.7.3

On 07/13/2015 06:32 PM, Adam Burns wrote: Got Vagrant 1.7.3 to inter-operate with the current TAILS Rakefile by adding explicit paths for some extra require commands. This likely is not needed once ruby/rake system paths for require commands are set correctly (I'm a ruby/rake n00b). The

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated builds specification

On 06/16/2015 02:41 PM, bertagaz wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 01:59:06PM +0200, intrigeri wrote: anonym wrote (30 Mar 2015 07:48:28 GMT) : On 29/03/15 15:04, bertagaz wrote: Wild (possibly unrelated) idea: instead of only notifying the author of the last commit of a topic branch, what

Re: [Tails-dev] RFC: persistent Tor state

On 05/21/2015 05:38 PM, sajolida wrote: intrigeri: anonym and I have made great progress on this front, and we would like feedback from you folks regarding the state of our current reasoning and preferred design: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/5462 https://tails.boum.org/blueprint

Re: [Tails-dev] RFC: persistent Tor state

On 06/15/2015 07:09 PM, Alan wrote: The 1st drawback: If the attacker records that someone has been using a given Entry Guard at a given location in the past, and then someone uses the same Entry Guard at the same location, then there are chances that it's the same person who is back to that

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4.1] bugfix/9126-deny-tor-browser-access-to-recently-used

On 06/06/2015 05:02 PM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, this branch denies Tor Browser access to the list of recently used documents. Please review'n'merge into stable. Thanks! Merged! Cheers! ___ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4.1] bugfix/9364-do-not-modify-hardware-clock

On 06/05/2015 07:22 PM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, this branch should fix #9364, that is we may be currently modifying the hardware clock on shutdown. I've tried (not very hard) for a week to test this on bare metal but failed to find appropriate hardware. It should be easy for the reviewer,

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4.1] bugfix/7249-truncated-notifications

On 06/11/2015 01:39 PM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, I don't know why, back when we were getting Tails/Wheezy ready I did everything so that this bug would be fixed (well, not really, but improved a bit) in Jessie, and then I forgot to bring the improvements back to Tails. Thanks to goupille (who

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4.1] bugfix/9523-eatmydata-v82-everywhere

On 06/10/2015 02:28 PM, intrigeri wrote: Assigned to anonym since our other usual reviewers seem to be mostly unavailable these days. Please merge into stable, devel and experimental, and then ping me so that I can: * upgrade eatmydata on our Jenkins ISO builders (without the backport

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4.1] bugfix/9406-jenkins-build-in-clean-git

On 05/15/2015 11:28 AM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, the proposed branch fixes build failures in Jenkins, that are caused by our build system refreshing the wiki (uh, twice) *before* merging the base branch. Please review'n'merge into stable and devel (the earlier it's done, the less Jenkins

Re: [Tails-dev] Release versioning

On 06/03/2015 12:26 PM, intrigeri wrote: anonym wrote (31 May 2015 22:20:13 GMT) : * 2.0 = Tails_maintainability * 3.0 = Tails_hardening * 4.0 = Tails_jessie Yay, I like it! Note that strictly speaking, we don't need the Tails_ prefix. Also, I would find it nice to clearly distinguish

Re: [Tails-dev] Release versioning

On 06/03/2015 12:38 PM, intrigeri wrote: sajolida wrote (01 Jun 2015 11:31:18 GMT) : anonym: Couldn't we add an extra number only when we do an emergency release? I think we can, and we should. Let's just be clear on that it is the action of adding an extra *last* number for emergency

Re: [Tails-dev] Release versioning

On 06/03/2015 01:51 PM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, anonym wrote (03 Jun 2015 11:22:31 GMT) : On 06/03/2015 12:26 PM, intrigeri wrote: Note that strictly speaking, we don't need the Tails_ prefix. Also, I would find it nice to clearly distinguish the target versions that will be 100% reached

Re: [Tails-dev] Release versioning

On 05/29/2015 05:19 PM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, it popped up to my mind that our current versioning scheme is a bit painful whenever we need to insert an unexpected release: e.g. when we've put out 1.3.1, it stole a version number that was reserved, which can result in some confusion, e.g.

Re: [Tails-dev] Release versioning

On 05/31/2015 09:24 AM, intrigeri wrote: * we're not very clear what the first component means (1.0 had a well-defined meaning, no idea what 2.0 will be; we're currently using 2.0 and 3.0 on our roadmap to make mid/long-term perspectives and goals more readable to everyone involved,

Re: [Tails-dev] review'n'merge: feature/7976-disallow-lan-in-tor-browser

On 05/26/2015 12:56 PM, anonym wrote: I guess we could see 1 as optional: * If we skip 1, then we can simply do what FoxyProxy does, i.e. add another bullet in the list of possible explanations for the connection error, e.g. The Tor Browser blocks access to the local network bla bla

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4.1] eatmydata is not being used in the build chroot (#9419)

On 05/20/2015 08:51 AM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, it was noticed that eatmydata is actually *not* being used for most of the Tails build process. Let's fix that. I benchmarked this while doing some other stuff. The speedup isn't very big. :) The needed changes live in two different

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4.1] bugfix/9417-no-var-cache-man

On 05/20/2015 08:45 AM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, commit f2fb13129cc9f566a1918acdc78db5d7cd4a6776 Author: intrigeri intrig...@boum.org Date: Sun May 17 10:28:39 2015 + Stop shipping /var/cache/man/* in the ISO. Not only this directory needlessly takes room in ISO images,

Re: [Tails-dev] review'n'merge: feature/7976-disallow-lan-in-tor-browser

On 05/26/2015 09:52 AM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, for the record, #8711 (Investigate how we could improve the error message when browsing LAN from usual Tor Browser) was initially seen as blocking this work, and anonym's current proposal is to postpone that part, and to treat with with a

Re: [Tails-dev] review'n'merge: feature/7976-disallow-lan-in-tor-browser

On 05/26/2015 12:56 PM, anonym wrote: I did my homework: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/7976 Argh, I meant: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9466 Cheers! ___ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org

Re: [Tails-dev] review'n'merge: feature/7976-disallow-lan-in-tor-browser

On 05/26/2015 02:24 PM, sajolida wrote: anonym: On 05/26/2015 09:52 AM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, for the record, #8711 (Investigate how we could improve the error message when browsing LAN from usual Tor Browser) was initially seen as blocking this work, and anonym's current proposal

Re: [Tails-dev] Question regarding Tails build

On 05/23/2015 10:15 AM, Adam Burns wrote: Hi anonym, On 05/23/2015 09:09 AM, anonym wrote: On 05/22/2015 01:31 PM, Adam Burns wrote: I've taken a very quick look at this. As the ticket #8086 suggests, it is an issue in the way Rake is used with a Monkey-patched Vagrant to build TAILS

Re: [Tails-dev] Question regarding Tails build

On 05/22/2015 01:31 PM, Adam Burns wrote: I've taken a very quick look at this. As the ticket #8086 suggests, it is an issue in the way Rake is used with a Monkey-patched Vagrant to build TAILS. The monkey patch is against *Vagrant*, and has nothing to do with Rake. IIRC newer versions of

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4] bugfix/9370-AppArmor-hardening-Pidgin

On 05/11/2015 04:01 PM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, this branch fixes a hole in Pidgin (and possibly other apps) AppArmor confinement, discovered thanks to the ongoing audit of our AppArmor policy (#8007). Kill Your TV has run the relevant automated tests and they pass. Please review'n'merge, and

Re: [Tails-dev] Truly Random Mac Changer

On 05/08/2015 10:11 PM, intrigeri wrote: Peter N. Glaskowsky wrote (08 May 2015 18:59:35 GMT) : On May 8, 2015, at 10:20 AM, intrigeri intrig...@boum.org wrote: Source Valley wrote (08 May 2015 16:55:50 GMT) : There are countless example I can think of where one might need a truly random mac

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.4] bugfix/9309-default-disconnect-search

Hi, I won't say much here; read the ticket, especially for the convenient testing instructions. The important thing is that this is a bit more of a feature than a bugfix, that we normally do not allow post-freeze. It does improve the browser localization situation a lot, however, beyond solving

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4] feature/9340-Linux-from-Stretch

On 05/05/2015 09:52 AM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, as explained on #9340, without this change, our build system will very soon start producing unbootable ISO images. Please merge into stable, testing, devel and feature/jessie. Filed #9341 for the next steps (once Linux 4.0 migrates to Debian

Re: [Tails-dev] Getting rid of review'n'merge email on this list

On 05/05/2015 08:42 PM, intrigeri wrote: sajolida wrote (05 May 2015 13:45:39 GMT) : I'm not in favor of completely getting rid of them. I think that even if we use one of the solutions that you are proposing, we should still notify the list when we feel that more than two people should have a

Re: [Tails-dev] Getting rid of review'n'merge email on this list

the benefits of (B) don't seem worth adding it to that team's plate. It seems we can get a perfect solution easier by having an Atom feed for both to Ready for QA and Fix committed. Full background: (21:31:37) anonym: intrigeri: actually, I just thought of something you said in your email re

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.4] bugfix/9328-fix-restart-tor-script

Hi, Please merge into devel and testing. Cheers! ___ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4] bugfix/9261-Tor-Browser-a11y

On 04/19/2015 03:09 PM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, sajolida reported that Tor Browser crashes on key press when read by Orca: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9261 That's caused by AppArmor confinement, and is fixed by the proposed branch. Please merge into stable and devel. I've verified

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4] bugfix/6073-cleanup-packages-list

On 04/18/2015 10:58 AM, intrigeri wrote: Hi, this branch finally implements a bunch of cleanups that I've been postponing for a while. Please merge into devel (and stable if you feel like it). My diff results can be found on https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/6073#note-9 -- but I didn't

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.4] feature/9305-hide-addons-manager-in-unsafe-browser

Hi, Please merge into the devel branch if you do it before the freeze (ask me on #tails-...@irc.oftc.net if doing it today) otherwise merge it into the testing branch. Cheers! ___ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org

Re: [Tails-dev] Tails contributors meeting: Sunday May 03

On 15/04/15 09:00, sajolida wrote: Feel free to propose and prepare discussion topics. Either: - Raise them in this thread so that others can ask details and prepare the discussion too. I'd like to discuss #9298: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9298 Cheers!

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.4] feature/8925-tor-0.2.6

Hi, Do you want to close six tickets? Those are: * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/7934 (main) * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9114 * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/7620 * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/7087 * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/6840 *

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.4] feature/9031-tor-browser-4.5

Hi, Do you want to close four tickets? Those are: * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9031 (main) * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/8696 * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/8092 * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/7647 (The non-(main) tickets are part of the (main) ticket, so have a

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4] bugfix/9044-syslinux-on-chromebooks

On 15/04/15 14:38, intrigeri wrote: anonym wrote (15 Apr 2015 09:24:48 GMT) : The branch is based on devel (although only the changelog (1.4 dummy entry) differs from stable), but it is a bugfix so we'd miss out on it in a potential Tails 1.3.3. Is this really intentional? Yes. I didn't

Re: [Tails-dev] Release schedule for Tails 1.4

On 10/04/15 07:58, Georg Koppen wrote: anonym: - Tor Browser 4.5.x, based on Firefox 38.0.0esr, is hopefully out so we can import it. Just a minor correction: 4.5 won't be based on ESR 38. The switch to the new long-term support version is going to happen later this year (probably

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.4] bugfix/9149-set-sane-clock-at-early-boot

Hi, For details, see: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9149 Please review'n'merge into stable and devel. Cheers! ___ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4] bugfix/9044-syslinux-on-chromebooks

On 26/03/15 18:21, intrigeri wrote: Hi, please review'n'merge that branch's APT suite into the following APT suites: * devel (for 1.4) The branch is based on devel (although only the changelog (1.4 dummy entry) differs from stable), but it is a bugfix so we'd miss out on it in a

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4] bugfix/9190-localize-tails-upgrader

On 09/04/15 12:32, intrigeri wrote: Hi, no less than 3 (!) bugs are preventing Tails Upgrader's translated strings to be displayed to users. If I'm not mistaken, that's been the case... forever. Thanks to matsa for raising this issue yesterday. That should be fixed in

Re: [Tails-dev] [review'n'merge:1.4] feature/8996-improve-Vietnamese-fonts-support

On 04/03/15 10:53, intrigeri wrote: Hi, according to user feedback on #8996, this makes Vietnamese input (added in 1.3) usable in LibreOffice. As a side-effect, it should also make it way easier to work on e.g. office documents that were created on Windows, as the shipped fonts are meant

[Tails-dev] Post-1.3.2 ticket assignments and postponements

Hi, Tails 1.3.2 has been released but it's Release Manager view is still not empty: https://labs.riseup.net/code/projects/tails/issues?query_id=175 BTW, when releasing, 36 tickets were still open and in need of being either postponed or made into a Hole in the roof. It sounds like a pretty

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated builds specification

On 29/03/15 15:04, bertagaz wrote: Hi, Sorry, lagging a bit one my emails. On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 04:44:32PM +0100, intrigeri wrote: Hi, anonym wrote (24 Mar 2015 16:50:06 GMT) : However, I think the reason I asked for this feature was to trigger rebuilds when the feature branch's APT

Re: [Tails-dev] Build failed in Jenkins: build_Tails_ISO_stable #317

On 30/03/15 19:23, tails-sysadm...@boum.org wrote: Failed to fetch http://deb.tails.boum.org/pool/main/t/tails-iuk/tails-iuk_1.20-1_all.deb Size mismatch Failed to fetch http://deb.tails.boum.org/pool/main/t/tails-persistence-setup/tails-persistence-setup_1.0.21-1_all.deb Size mismatch

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.3.2] feature/tor-browser-4.0.6

Hi, Ticket: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9121 Please review and merge into stable and devel. I've successfully run all browser-related (i.e. using {Tor,I2P,Unsafe} Browser in *any* way) .feature:s successfully: features/i2p.feature features/pidgin.feature

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.3.2] bugfix/8687-macchanger-return-status

Hi, Please review and merge into stable and devel. Cheers! ___ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.

Re: [Tails-dev] [Tails-support] PGP MIME is insecure (for me)

On 10/03/15 16:32, sajolida wrote: matsa: On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 12:26:41 + sajolida sajol...@pimienta.org wrote: It has something to do with the fact that once you encrypt a message for the receiving party, you may not be able to decrypt it yourself. A message in the 'drafts' folder is

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated builds specification

On 25/03/15 16:44, intrigeri wrote: Hi, anonym wrote (24 Mar 2015 16:50:06 GMT) : However, I think the reason I asked for this feature was to trigger rebuilds when the feature branch's APT suite has been updated. From reading the blueprint it only mentions Git, so I assume the watchdog

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated builds specification

On 01/03/15 12:49, intrigeri wrote: hi, bertagaz wrote (27 Feb 2015 10:07:03 GMT) : On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 08:46:17PM +0100, bertagaz wrote: On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 05:21:23PM +0100, anonym wrote: On 11/01/15 20:07, Jurre van Bergen wrote: Developers should be able to trigger automatic

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.3.2] bugfix/9011-fix-syndaemon-vs-florence

Hi, Please review and merge into stable and devel. Bonus points for also merging it into feature/jessie, and then: git revert 430709a8efad146d30980a2e3377a4e00be3e995 and adding something like This was a Wheezy-specific workaround to the revert's commit message. Cheers!

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.3.1] feature/tor-launcher-0.2.7.2

Hi, This branch upgrades Tor Launcher, which will fix: * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/6985 * https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/8964 I've upgraded the test suite as necessary and successfully run it on an image built from this branch for the relevant tests, i.e. tor_bridges.feature and

Re: [Tails-dev] gnupg keyserver-options http-proxy value?

On 18/03/15 21:59, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: Hi folks-- I was looking at an old Tails instance i've had around for a while with a persistence volume containing ~/.gnupg from back around tails 0.21 or so. i found that talking to the keyservers via gpg --search dkg was failing. Looking

[Tails-dev] [review'n'merge: 1.3.1] bugfix/9071-fix-shell-expansion-issue

Hi, Please review'n'merge into stable and devel. Cheers! ___ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.

Re: [Tails-dev] [Corrected!] Release schedule for Tails 1.3.1

On 06/03/15 15:34, anonym wrote: Here's the preliminary release schedule: * 2015-03-28: - All branches targeting Tails 1.3.1 must be merged into the 'stable' branch by noon CET. - Tor Browser 4.x, based on Firefox 31.6.0esr is *hopefully* out, so we can import it. - Build

Re: [Tails-dev] Release schedule for Tails 1.3.1

On 06/03/15 15:34, anonym wrote: Hi, I'll be the release manager for Tails 1.3.1, which currently is scheduled to be released on 2015-04-07 [1]. However, Firefox 37, which was supposed to ship that date, has been moved up one week, to 2015-03-31 [2] to not coincide with Easter. I presume

[Tails-dev] Release schedule for Tails 1.3.1

Hi, I'll be the release manager for Tails 1.3.1, which currently is scheduled to be released on 2015-04-07 [1]. However, Firefox 37, which was supposed to ship that date, has been moved up one week, to 2015-03-31 [2] to not coincide with Easter. I presume that the same goes for the 31.6.0esr

[Tails-dev] The 'experimental' branch has been reset (post-1.3)

Hi, This was supposed to be done with the post-1.3 release steps, but I delayed it because of the Git rewrite. Also, I skipped feature/8665-remove-adblock since there's quite some controversy around whether we want it or not. Cheers! ___ Tails-dev

Re: [Tails-dev] Automated builds specification

On 11/01/15 20:07, Jurre van Bergen wrote: https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/automated_builds_and_tests/autobuild_specs/ Sorry for joining in so late. All looks good, and I only have minor concerns. Developers should be able to trigger automatic builds for a branch whose build was dropped (eg.

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >