[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#25061: consider adding %COMPAT to default gnutls priority string

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: bug#25061: consider adding %COMPAT to default gnutls priority string
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2017 16:49:20 +0300

> From: Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden>
> Gmane-Reply-To-List: yes
> Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 11:04:55 -0500
> Cc: address@hidden, Ludovic Court├Ęs <address@hidden>,
>  Lars Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden>
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:51:39 +0100 Andy Wingo <address@hidden> wrote: 
> AW> I tried checking (had to remember what I was doing to begin with!) and
> AW> was not able to reproduce the original problem, and therefore couldn't
> AW> test NORMAL:%COMPAT or NORMAL:%DUMBFW :/  Sorry :/
> AW> I was trying to just do this:
> AW>   ;; uncomment to test original proposed workaround
> AW>   ;; (setq gnutls-algorithm-priority "NORMAL:%COMPAT")
> AW>   (setq gnutls-log-level 2)
> AW>   (url-retrieve "https://mirror.hydra.gnu.org/";
> AW>                 #'(lambda (status)
> AW>                     (message "success")))
> AW> and evaluating that last form a number of times.  Not very scientific :P
> AW> I was unable to reproduce the problem though.
> Thanks, Andy.
> We were just talking with Michael about connection-specific settings;
> this is a perfect use case. It will be one of the first things we use
> for testing. So that will resolve the need for per-connection
> adjustments, and we can focus on just the default value.
> Does anyone think we should add %COMPAT or %DUMBFW to the default
> priority string? Without definitive proof that it will help, I'm not
> sure we should, but I'm open to comments. Either way, we'll document it.

Any progress on this one, Ted?  This bug currently blocks the release
of Emacs 26.1, so could we please expedite its resolution, whatever
that is?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]