From kousik.nandy at gmail.com  Mon Nov  6 01:27:45 2006
From: kousik.nandy at gmail.com (Kousik Nandy)
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 11:57:45 +0530
Subject: [OTR-dev] gaim 2 beta 4, patch to compile
Message-ID: <257738bd0611052227i5a07fccfkbecb7746d620bc28@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

When compiling gaim-otr for beta 4, I got the following error:

gtk-dialog.c:33:22: gtkstock.h: No such file or directory
gtk-dialog.c: In function `create_dialog':
gtk-dialog.c:651: error: `GAIM_STOCK_DIALOG_ERROR' undeclared (first
use in this function)
gtk-dialog.c:651: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once

I digged around to see in beta 4, gtkstock.h has been renamed to gaimstock.h

Attached is the full patch for beta 4, maybe we can publish a unified
patch which checks the minor version, and include either gtkstock.h or
gaimstock.h as per it is beta 2/3 or 4.

regards
Kousik.

-- 
Kousik Nandy | kousiknandy at gmail.com | Network & Security |
Cryptography | Photography | Free Software, Linux Hacking |
Nature, Wildlife, Birdwatching | http://kousik.blogspot.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: beta4.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 9870 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/pipermail/otr-dev/attachments/20061106/0136396f/attachment.bin>

From paul at cypherpunks.ca  Tue Nov  7 10:53:47 2006
From: paul at cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters)
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 16:53:47 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [OTR-dev] gaim 2 beta 4, patch to compile
In-Reply-To: <257738bd0611052227i5a07fccfkbecb7746d620bc28@mail.gmail.com>
References: <257738bd0611052227i5a07fccfkbecb7746d620bc28@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611071650520.1702@tla.xelerance.com>

On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Kousik Nandy wrote:

>
> When compiling gaim-otr for beta 4, I got the following error:
>
> gtk-dialog.c:33:22: gtkstock.h: No such file or directory
> gtk-dialog.c: In function `create_dialog':
> gtk-dialog.c:651: error: `GAIM_STOCK_DIALOG_ERROR' undeclared (first
> use in this function)
> gtk-dialog.c:651: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
>
> I digged around to see in beta 4, gtkstock.h has been renamed to gaimstock.h
>
> Attached is the full patch for beta 4,

I had a patch for the gtkstick.h and the GAIM_* define errors, but you have
added moer defines. Why were those necessary, since the FC6-extras version
seem to work fully without the additiona #ifdef's you added.

> maybe we can publish a unified
> patch which checks the minor version, and include either gtkstock.h or
> gaimstock.h as per it is beta 2/3 or 4.

I don't need we should do that for "betas". As soon as 2.0.0 final is
released, we should only check for 1.5.x vs 2.0.x and forget about
all the beta releases in the middle.

Paul
ps.I am still waiting for my build environment at home to come back up, so
I can release a gaim.dll for beta4 for windows. But I am 6 hours away
from home until saturday.


From nikita at uiuc.edu  Tue Nov  7 11:24:26 2006
From: nikita at uiuc.edu (Nikita Borisov)
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 10:24:26 -0600
Subject: [OTR-dev] gaim 2 beta 4, patch to compile
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611071650520.1702@tla.xelerance.com>
References: <257738bd0611052227i5a07fccfkbecb7746d620bc28@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611071650520.1702@tla.xelerance.com>
Message-ID: <16f0378d0611070824s4f841adbla6fcd2c7faad4d44@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/7/06, Paul Wouters <paul at cypherpunks.ca> wrote:
> > maybe we can publish a unified
> > patch which checks the minor version, and include either gtkstock.h or
> > gaimstock.h as per it is beta 2/3 or 4.
>
> I don't need we should do that for "betas". As soon as 2.0.0 final is
> released, we should only check for 1.5.x vs 2.0.x and forget about
> all the beta releases in the middle.

In fact, last I checked, the minor version is 0 for all gaim2 betas,
so we can't really use that as a solution.

- Nikita


From kousik.nandy at gmail.com  Tue Nov  7 15:31:12 2006
From: kousik.nandy at gmail.com (Kousik Nandy)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 02:01:12 +0530
Subject: [OTR-dev] gaim 2 beta 4, patch to compile
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611071650520.1702@tla.xelerance.com>
References: <257738bd0611052227i5a07fccfkbecb7746d620bc28@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611071650520.1702@tla.xelerance.com>
Message-ID: <257738bd0611071231p13a1c20cp6cb8a28c52168745@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/7/06, Paul Wouters <paul at cypherpunks.ca> wrote:
[...]
> >
> > I digged around to see in beta 4, gtkstock.h has been renamed to gaimstock.h
>
> I had a patch for the gtkstick.h and the GAIM_* define errors, but you have
> added moer defines. Why were those necessary,

Uh, my patch should be identical with the gaim2beta2 patch available
in the OTR page except one single change: #include "gtkstock.h" is
replaced by #include "gaimstock.h"
Any additional change is extraneous and can be discarded (and I
believe there aren't).

> I don't need we should do that for "betas". As soon as 2.0.0 final is
> released, we should only check for 1.5.x vs 2.0.x

Fair enough. So as we publish a beta2 patch, we can publish a beta4
patch too, "on top of" the beta2 patch, as available in
http://kousik.blogspot.com/2006/11/otr-plugin-on-gaim-2-beta-4.html

regards
Kousik


From alex323 at gmail.com  Tue Nov  7 15:42:57 2006
From: alex323 at gmail.com (Alex)
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 15:42:57 -0500
Subject: [OTR-dev] Code modifications concerning fragmentation
Message-ID: <20061107154257.26cf8ef8@darwin>

Has anyone been able to solve the problem of sending fragments? In
order for fragmentation to work, a lot of code would need to be
rewritten and changed. For example, a message pointer is currently used
to return the secured message instead of inject_message, but it only
allows for one message. inject_message is the easiest way of
communicating the fragments to the host program, but then the gaim-otr
plugin would need to be changed. Any ideas?

-- 
Alex


From paul at cypherpunks.ca  Tue Nov  7 21:52:40 2006
From: paul at cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 03:52:40 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [OTR-dev] gaim 2 beta 4, patch to compile
In-Reply-To: <257738bd0611071231p13a1c20cp6cb8a28c52168745@mail.gmail.com>
References: <257738bd0611052227i5a07fccfkbecb7746d620bc28@mail.gmail.com> 
 <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611071650520.1702@tla.xelerance.com>
 <257738bd0611071231p13a1c20cp6cb8a28c52168745@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611080349140.18225@tla.xelerance.com>

On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Kousik Nandy wrote:

>
> Uh, my patch should be identical with the gaim2beta2 patch available
> in the OTR page except one single change: #include "gtkstock.h" is
> replaced by #include "gaimstock.h"

Then I think you miss something?

The patch against the latest CVS snapshot is:
(not supporting gaim 1.5, Ian can add teh #idef's):

http://chameleon.cypherpunks.ca/gaim-beta4.patch

It includes a few changes of GAIM_STOCK_* into GTK_STOCK_*

> Fair enough. So as we publish a beta2 patch, we can publish a beta4
> patch too

What should really happen is a real release instead of this mucking
in cvs versions. I hope Ian will do this as soon as we got a Windows
DLL as well. (I'm still waiting for my link to come back up)

Paul


From kousik.nandy at gmail.com  Wed Nov  8 00:30:33 2006
From: kousik.nandy at gmail.com (Kousik Nandy)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 11:00:33 +0530
Subject: [OTR-dev] gaim 2 beta 4, patch to compile
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611080349140.18225@tla.xelerance.com>
References: <257738bd0611052227i5a07fccfkbecb7746d620bc28@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611071650520.1702@tla.xelerance.com>
	 <257738bd0611071231p13a1c20cp6cb8a28c52168745@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611080349140.18225@tla.xelerance.com>
Message-ID: <257738bd0611072130k64a0ca66m42f8bc96d2819f48@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/8/06, Paul Wouters <paul at cypherpunks.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Kousik Nandy wrote:
[...]
> The patch against the latest CVS snapshot is:
> (not supporting gaim 1.5, Ian can add teh #idef's):
>
> http://chameleon.cypherpunks.ca/gaim-beta4.patch
>
> It includes a few changes of GAIM_STOCK_* into GTK_STOCK_*

Those changes aren't necessary at all if we include "gaimstock.h"
instead of "gtkstock.h" (beta4 onwards). Rest of beta 2 patch stays
valid.

Kousik


From paul at cypherpunks.ca  Sun Nov 19 23:12:02 2006
From: paul at cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 05:12:02 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [OTR-dev] Two GUI issues
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611200508010.27615@tla.xelerance.com>

While testing and running 2.0.0beta4 and gaim-otr we noticed two things.

1) The first OTR window to pop up "new fingerprint presented to you" is
   confusing (and useless). It shows the new fingerprint, but not the
   full identity of the user. It also does not show my own key. And it
   asks for "OK". This makes me think I need to "OK" the key, instead of
   "OK"ing the window. I suggest to just get rid of this window altogether
   and replace it with the "verify fingerprint" window, which really has
   everything we need, including a default of "I have not verified" for
   the OK button.
2) The verify fingerprint windows says "Fingerprint for you, myusername".
   This is confusing. Is it MY fingerprint or is it the other fingerprint
   that is "for me". Change "fingerprint for you" to "your fingerprint of"

Paul


From gdt at ir.bbn.com  Tue Nov 21 06:11:58 2006
From: gdt at ir.bbn.com (Greg Troxel)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 06:11:58 -0500
Subject: [OTR-dev] Gaim 2.0.0beta4
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0610280804540.26516@tla.xelerance.com> (Paul
	Wouters's message of "Sat\, 28 Oct 2006 08\:27\:35 +0200 \(CEST\)")
References: <1161363301.15169.6.camel@midnight>
	<Pine.LNX.4.63.0610240546040.21341@tla.xelerance.com>
	<200610240814.24174.wezlo@comcast.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.63.0610280804540.26516@tla.xelerance.com>
Message-ID: <rmizmalrr41.fsf@fnord.ir.bbn.com>


  for fedora I had to change the path to the gtk include files manually.

  Ian: any change for a configure option for that the gtk2 includes? Fedora
  now puts it in /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gtk

We should be using pkg-config to find include and link paths.  NetBSD
pkgsrc puts the includes in /usr/pkg/include/gtk-2.0, but pkg-config
looks right.

> pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0
-O2 -DXTHREADS -I/usr/pkg/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/pkg/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/pkg/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/pkg/include/cairo -I/usr/pkg/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/pkg/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/pkg/include/glib/glib-2.0 -I/usr/pkg/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/pkg/include/freetype2 -I/usr/pkg/include/libpng12
> pkg-config --libs gtk+-2.0
-Wl,-R/usr/pkg/lib -Wl,--rpath -Wl,/usr/pkg/lib -Wl,-R/usr/X11R6/lib -L/usr/pkg/lib -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -lXi -latk-1.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lpangocairo-1.0 -lXrandr -lXext -lXcursor -lXfixes -lcairo -lpangoft2-1.0 -lfontconfig -lfreetype -lz -lpango-1.0 -lm -lXrender -lX11 -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -lintl




-- 
    Greg Troxel <gdt at ir.bbn.com>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 185 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/pipermail/otr-dev/attachments/20061121/a5827964/attachment.pgp>

From ian at cypherpunks.ca  Tue Nov 28 18:40:28 2006
From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg)
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:40:28 -0500
Subject: [OTR-dev] Gaim 2.0.0beta4
In-Reply-To: <rmizmalrr41.fsf@fnord.ir.bbn.com>
References: <1161363301.15169.6.camel@midnight> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0610240546040.21341@tla.xelerance.com> <200610240814.24174.wezlo@comcast.net> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0610280804540.26516@tla.xelerance.com> <rmizmalrr41.fsf@fnord.ir.bbn.com>
Message-ID: <20061128234028.GC5869@yoink.cs.uwaterloo.ca>

On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 06:11:58AM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
> 
>   for fedora I had to change the path to the gtk include files manually.
> 
>   Ian: any change for a configure option for that the gtk2 includes? Fedora
>   now puts it in /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gtk
> 
> We should be using pkg-config to find include and link paths.  NetBSD
> pkgsrc puts the includes in /usr/pkg/include/gtk-2.0, but pkg-config
> looks right.

I don't understand.  We *are* using pkg-config (at least when we're not
cross-compiling for mingw).  Paul, does Fedora's pkg-config not report
the correct location for the gtk include files?  Or am I
misunderstanding your question?

   - Ian