From gdt at ir.bbn.com  Tue Feb  1 14:23:54 2011
From: gdt at ir.bbn.com (Greg Troxel)
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 14:23:54 -0500
Subject: [OTR-dev] dynamic linking and gtk_imhtml_append_text_with_images
In-Reply-To: <20110131162457.GC30949@thunk.cs.uwaterloo.ca> (Ian Goldberg's
	message of "Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:24:57 -0500")
References: <rmivd1c7jjk.fsf@fnord.ir.bbn.com>
	<20110131162457.GC30949@thunk.cs.uwaterloo.ca>
Message-ID: <rmi39o736et.fsf@fnord.ir.bbn.com>


Ian Goldberg <ian at cypherpunks.ca> writes:

> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 04:36:15PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
>> Specifically:
>> 
>>   how is the U symbol gtk_imhtml_append_text_with_image in the plugin
>>   resolved if pidgin is stripped?
>
> pidgin plugins use *lots* of functions provided by pidgin.

OK; I would expect that.

> $ nm pidgin-otr.so | egrep ' U (pidgin|purple)'
>
> shows 54 such functions.  So however those functions get resolved,
> gtk_imhtml_append_text_with_image should be the same.

I also see 54 functions, on NetBSD, plus
gtk_imhtml_append_text_with_image.

But /usr/pkg/bin/pidgin has no symbols.  This in and of itself does not
seem strange, but I am quite boggled as to how the symbols are resolved
(which on NetBSD, obviously they are - everything works fine).

I'm guessing you are using Linux; does the pidgin binary have symbols
(for the U ones in pidgin-otr.so)?

> Now it could be that some more recent version of pidgin has removed that
> function.  That would indeed be trickier, as pidgin-otr would have to be
> rewritten so as to not expect it.

I don't think that's the case; the sources that I am building from on
the mac are the same as on NetBSD, and I can see the function.

>>   how are symbols in gtk resolved in the plugin if the plugin does not
>>   link against gtk?  Are they available because pidgin has linked
>>   against them?
>
> Yes, usually.

So that part will probably be ok; my problem may be only how the
dynamically loaded plugin resolves against pidgin's symbols.

>>   How can pidgin-otr work with the text-mode libpurple client?  Or is
>>   this truly a pidgin plugin only?
>
> pidgin-otr is architected with a separation between the logic and the
> ui.  As normally built, the ui is the gtk one which is intended to work
> with pidgin.  If someone were to write a different ui part, the intent
> is that it would work fine with finch.  (But I don't know of anyone
> who's done that yet.)

OK, that makes sense.


Thanks for the hints; I'll keep looking into this as I have time.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/pipermail/otr-dev/attachments/20110201/0965a829/attachment.pgp>

From schlick at lavabit.com  Fri Feb  4 11:51:47 2011
From: schlick at lavabit.com (Andreas Schlick)
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 17:51:47 +0100
Subject: [OTR-dev] OTR development
Message-ID: <201102041751.47731.schlick@lavabit.com>

Hello,

I am wondering a bit about the state of OTR, because there hasn't been any 
news on the homepage since 2009 and I could find only an empty git repository 
at sourceforge (the cvs one was completely unavailable, probably due to the 
recent attack). Hopefully the project isn't abandoned.
Is there another git repository where the development takes place? I am asking 
because I have started to port the otr plugin to finch and if there was a 
chance of it getting included, I'd like to rebase it on the latest version and 
submit it.

Andreas



From paul at cypherpunks.ca  Fri Feb  4 19:03:28 2011
From: paul at cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters)
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 19:03:28 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [OTR-dev] OTR development
In-Reply-To: <201102041751.47731.schlick@lavabit.com>
References: <201102041751.47731.schlick@lavabit.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.1102041859120.6516@newtla.xelerance.com>

On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Andreas Schlick wrote:

> I am wondering a bit about the state of OTR, because there hasn't been any
> news on the homepage since 2009 and I could find only an empty git repository
> at sourceforge (the cvs one was completely unavailable, probably due to the
> recent attack). Hopefully the project isn't abandoned.
> Is there another git repository where the development takes place? I am asking
> because I have started to port the otr plugin to finch and if there was a
> chance of it getting included, I'd like to rebase it on the latest version and
> submit it.

While doing the GSoC program, we had a git repo. It's slightly different from
upstream:

git://gsoc.xelerance.com/libotr.git
git://gsoc.xelerance.com/pidgin-otr.git

But AFAIK, there is now a full time resource working on otr. I just don't know
if there is a public repository for that code.

Paul


From ian at cypherpunks.ca  Sat Feb  5 01:16:35 2011
From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg)
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 01:16:35 -0500
Subject: [OTR-dev] OTR development
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.10.1102041859120.6516@newtla.xelerance.com>
References: <201102041751.47731.schlick@lavabit.com>
	<alpine.LFD.1.10.1102041859120.6516@newtla.xelerance.com>
Message-ID: <20110205061635.GT3858@yoink.cs.uwaterloo.ca>

On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 07:03:28PM -0500, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Andreas Schlick wrote:
> 
> >I am wondering a bit about the state of OTR, because there hasn't
> >been any news on the homepage since 2009 and I could find only an
> >empty git repository at sourceforge (the cvs one was completely
> >unavailable, probably due to the recent attack). Hopefully the
> >project isn't abandoned.  Is there another git repository where the
> >development takes place? I am asking because I have started to port
> >the otr plugin to finch and if there was a chance of it getting
> >included, I'd like to rebase it on the latest version and submit it.

That sounds great!

> But AFAIK, there is now a full time resource working on otr. I just
> don't know if there is a public repository for that code.

Rob's actually just getting the git repo into shape now.  We'll be
pushing to the sourceforge one soon.

   - Ian


From schlick at lavabit.com  Wed Feb  9 17:51:51 2011
From: schlick at lavabit.com (Andreas Schlick)
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 23:51:51 +0100
Subject: [OTR-dev] OTR development
In-Reply-To: <20110205061635.GT3858@yoink.cs.uwaterloo.ca>
References: <201102041751.47731.schlick@lavabit.com>
	<alpine.LFD.1.10.1102041859120.6516@newtla.xelerance.com>
	<20110205061635.GT3858@yoink.cs.uwaterloo.ca>
Message-ID: <201102092351.52631.schlick@lavabit.com>

Hello,

thank you both for replying! Glad to hear that the development is still going 
on. Would you prefer that I just post the patches for review or shall I wait 
for the git repo?

Andreas



From paul at cypherpunks.ca  Fri Feb 11 16:43:54 2011
From: paul at cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:43:54 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [OTR-dev] OTR development
In-Reply-To: <20110205061635.GT3858@yoink.cs.uwaterloo.ca>
References: <201102041751.47731.schlick@lavabit.com>
	<alpine.LFD.1.10.1102041859120.6516@newtla.xelerance.com>
	<20110205061635.GT3858@yoink.cs.uwaterloo.ca>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.1102111643320.28186@newtla.xelerance.com>

On Sat, 5 Feb 2011, Ian Goldberg wrote:

> Rob's actually just getting the git repo into shape now.  We'll be
> pushing to the sourceforge one soon.

not github?

Paul


From schlick at lavabit.com  Sat Feb 26 17:29:35 2011
From: schlick at lavabit.com (Andreas Schlick)
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:29:35 +0100
Subject: [OTR-dev] Wrong version in libotr.pc
Message-ID: <201102262329.35577.schlick@lavabit.com>

Hello,

it's great that the git repository is up! While testing it I found that 
libotr.pc is stuck at version 3.1.0.  I suggest to set it automatically by 
autoconf (see attached patch).

BTW, is there a reason why all the different projects are kept in the same 
repository? The setup is a bit uncommon and personally I find it rather 
restrictive and cumbersome to use. It would be really nice to have them in 
separate repositories.

Andreas
-------------- next part --------------
From: Andreas Schlick <schlick at lavabit.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:06:31 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Let autoconf set the current version in libotr.pc.

---
 libotr/libotr.pc.in |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/libotr/libotr.pc.in b/libotr/libotr.pc.in
index 9538f8e..05b7d43 100644
--- a/libotr/libotr.pc.in
+++ b/libotr/libotr.pc.in
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ includedir=@includedir@
 
 Name: libotr
 Description: Off-the-Record Messaging Library
-Version: 3.1.0
+Version: @VERSION@
 URL: http://otr.cypherpunks.ca/
 Libs: -L${libdir} -lotr
 Cflags: -I${includedir}
-- 
1.7.4.1