From jprvita at gmail.com Wed Jul 6 10:28:03 2011 From: jprvita at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_Paulo_Rechi_Vita?=) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 11:28:03 -0300 Subject: [OTR-dev] [PATCH] pkg-config file version Message-ID: Hello, I think someone forgot to update libotr.pc.in when bumping the last release version, there is a patch attached. By the way, is there a git repository or something similar where patches should be based on so they get proper timestamp and authorship? Last but not least, thanks for you job with libotr :) -- Jo?o Paulo Rechi Vita http://jprvita.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: update-pc-version.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 327 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jprvita at gmail.com Fri Jul 15 10:19:31 2011 From: jprvita at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_Paulo_Rechi_Vita?=) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:19:31 -0300 Subject: [OTR-dev] Inconsistent message state between peers using pidgin otr plugin Message-ID: Hello OTR devs, I'm add OTR support for XMPP on Telepathy/Empathy and using the pidgin plugin as a reference. While testing my code against pidgin I've notice some strange behavior and when verifying using pidgin against pidgin I've found a way to put one peer into "Unverified" and the other into "Not Private" state. These are the steps to reproduce: 1. Establish an unverified session between the peers; 2. One peer goes offline; 3. While offline, the same peer closes pidgin; 4. The same peer re-opens pidgin and goes back online; At this point the peer which has closed/re-opened pidgin is in the "Not Private" state, but the other peer (which remained opened all the time) didn't received any notification that the OTR session has been finished. If any of them tries to send a message, an error occurs. Is this an expected behavior? Thanks for your time, PS: I've sent another message a few days ago with a patch for libotr.pc, did it ever made to the list? -- Jo?o Paulo Rechi Vita http://jprvita.wordpress.com/ From ian at cypherpunks.ca Sat Jul 16 16:17:04 2011 From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 16:17:04 -0400 Subject: [OTR-dev] Inconsistent message state between peers using pidgin otr plugin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110716201704.GQ25870@thunk.cs.uwaterloo.ca> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:19:31AM -0300, Jo?o Paulo Rechi Vita wrote: > Hello OTR devs, > > I'm add OTR support for XMPP on Telepathy/Empathy and using the pidgin > plugin as a reference. Great! > While testing my code against pidgin I've > notice some strange behavior and when verifying using pidgin against > pidgin I've found a way to put one peer into "Unverified" and the > other into "Not Private" state. These are the steps to reproduce: > > 1. Establish an unverified session between the peers; > 2. One peer goes offline; > 3. While offline, the same peer closes pidgin; > 4. The same peer re-opens pidgin and goes back online; > > At this point the peer which has closed/re-opened pidgin is in the > "Not Private" state, but the other peer (which remained opened all the > time) didn't received any notification that the OTR session has been > finished. If any of them tries to send a message, an error occurs. > > Is this an expected behavior? What error exactly are you seeing? If the just-reopened client sends a message first, the other side will just report that an unexpected unencrypted message was received, but that's not an error per se. If the other client sends a message first, an encrypted message will be received by the "not private" side, which will report the receipt of an unreadable encrypted message, trigger OTR to start up again, and the other side should resend the message. > Thanks for your time, > > PS: I've sent another message a few days ago with a patch for > libotr.pc, did it ever made to the list? I didn't see it. Just in case, please resend directly to me and to Rob Smits . Thanks, - Ian From ian at cypherpunks.ca Sat Jul 16 16:19:40 2011 From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 16:19:40 -0400 Subject: [OTR-dev] [PATCH] pkg-config file version In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110716201940.GR25870@thunk.cs.uwaterloo.ca> On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 11:28:03AM -0300, Jo?o Paulo Rechi Vita wrote: > Hello, > > I think someone forgot to update libotr.pc.in when bumping the last > release version, there is a patch attached. Oh, there it is. In fact, a previous patch had been sent in that makes it @VERSION@, which is arguably more correct. > By the way, is there a git repository or something similar where > patches should be based on so they get proper timestamp and > authorship? Mostly. The git repo at the otr project at sourceforce.net is the "official" one. > Last but not least, thanks for you job with libotr :) No problem. ;-) - Ian