I tried this branch on a PPC Debian stable (squeeze) machine, and it
appears to work fine. I saw no DNS requests, see no warnings about
res_ methods and at least one .onion worked.
(And no compiler warnings, woo!)
--
meejah
___
tor-dev mailing
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 04:37:55PM +, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
Hi Ian,
This version of Torsocks is the initial bug clean up that will lead us
into fixing larger issues such as that one. We think this is a good idea
as a few of those bugs are quite a lot of work and there were many
Ian Goldberg:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 04:16:30AM +, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
Hi,
Nick and I have been working on a torsocks release. At this point, I
think we're at the point where we want to declare a release candidate
which if it has no blockers, we'll likely call it a release. I think
Ian Goldberg:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 04:37:55PM +, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
Hi Ian,
This version of Torsocks is the initial bug clean up that will lead us
into fixing larger issues such as that one. We think this is a good idea
as a few of those bugs are quite a lot of work and there were
intrigeri:
Hi,
Jacob Appelbaum wrote (27 Jan 2013 04:16:30 GMT) :
I think this also includes all of the pending Debian fixes
I confirm.
Great, I think that means that we're ready to tag a torsocks release
unless someone shouts that we have a regression!
All the best,
Jake
Hi,
Is there any info from current Tor QA use?
I am trying to reproduce a Tor bug that causes a Windows-based Tor node
to crash (BSOD). The bug needs lots of Tor traffic going through the
node for it to crash.
I am looking for information on the safest way to diagnose a crashing
Tor node,
Hi,
I've created trac ticket[1] #8063.
The torsocks script has an option on which did't work and in the current
state I'm curious on which shell it did work :-)
The patch is included and only affects the src/torsocks.in file with a
oneliner. More details are included on the ticket.
