[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, an
From: |
Joe Orton |
Subject: |
Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce |
Date: |
Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:05:03 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 12:51:05AM -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Fri 2008-11-21 08:20:40 -0500, Joe Orton wrote:
>
> > neon already has a callback which does that, yeah.
> >
> > Daniel, can you try this neon patch?
>
> OK, after figuring out how to build neon27 (don't try it in a path
> that contains the string "libneon" in it), i tried applying the patch.
I guess that's a problem with the Debian package build process?
> With tour patch, svn co just runs forever against an svn server
> configured with SSLVerifyClient optional, and never fetches anything.
Err, reading that patch again, it's complete rubbish. Could you try the
one below which is hopefully less rubbish? Thanks a lot for working on
this!
Index: src/ne_socket.c
===================================================================
--- src/ne_socket.c (revision 1607)
+++ src/ne_socket.c (working copy)
@@ -750,13 +750,18 @@
static ssize_t read_gnutls(ne_socket *sock, char *buffer, size_t len)
{
ssize_t ret;
+ unsigned reneg = 1; /* number of allowed rehandshakes */
ret = readable_gnutls(sock, sock->rdtimeout);
if (ret) return ret;
do {
- ret = gnutls_record_recv(sock->ssl, buffer, len);
- } while (RETRY_GNUTLS(sock, ret));
+ do {
+ ret = gnutls_record_recv(sock->ssl, buffer, len);
+ } while (RETRY_GNUTLS(sock, ret));
+
+ } while (ret == GNUTLS_E_REHANDSHAKE && reneg--
+ && (ret = gnutls_handshake(sock->ssl)) == GNUTLS_E_SUCCESS);
if (ret <= 0)
ret = error_gnutls(sock, ret);
- confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Daniel Kahn Gillmor, 2008/11/20
- Re: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2008/11/21
- Re: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Joe Orton, 2008/11/21
- Re: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2008/11/21
- Re: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Joe Orton, 2008/11/21
- Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Daniel Kahn Gillmor, 2008/11/22
- Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce,
Joe Orton <=
- Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Daniel Kahn Gillmor, 2008/11/22
- Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Joe Orton, 2008/11/22
- Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2008/11/23
- Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Joe Orton, 2008/11/28
- Re: Bug#480041: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos, 2008/11/29
Re: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Daniel Kahn Gillmor, 2008/11/21
Re: confirmation that debian #480041 is a gnutls problem, and steps to reproduce, Daniel Kahn Gillmor, 2008/11/21