IRC Logs for #crux-devel Wednesday, 2014-05-14

*** c0x has quit IRC10:15
*** c0x has joined #crux-devel10:16
jaegerAnyone run into the "server used client certificate" issue with openssl yet? I'm not able to connect to the wireless networks at work with my crux laptop due to this since the certificate that the RADIUS server uses has both server and client usability set12:55
jaegermaybe it was wpa_supplicant rather than openssl, having trouble finding the exact cause12:57
jaegeras I said that, I think I found it:
frinnstrj45 ftw12:59
frinnstI only use wifi on my cellphone pretty much, sorry12:59
jaegerfair enough. Just tested with that revert patch and it works properly13:04
jaegerjue: any objections to adding that patch to wpa_supplicant?13:06
prologicI may be putting (well I am actually) CRUX 3.1 onto my MacBook Air (5-1 gen)13:08
prologicSo perhaps I'll run into the same issue? :)13:09
jaegerOnly if your wireless networks use WPA-EAP with an SSL cert that has both client and server flags set13:09
prologicAnyone have any experience with this btw? I've never installed Linux (of any kind) onto a Laptop let alone a MacBook :)13:09
jaegerthough that's probably very common, actually13:09
prologicI believe they do actually13:09
prologicEduroam for one13:10
prologicthat's the main wifi I use at work13:10
jaegeryeah, eduroam is definitely one, I saw that in many of the searches13:10
jaegerI've used linux on a couple of older macbook pros but not recently. I've no doubt there are plenty of search results for it, though13:12
prologicthere are :)13:18
prologicI'm sure I'll be fine :)13:18
prologichow hard can it be?!13:18
frinnstfamous last words13:18
teK__after another two commits, opt-3.1/llvm-clang should be ready. btw.:)13:18
teK__+ hello folks13:18
jaegerheh, nice13:18
prologicllvm-clang nice13:19
prologicare we swapping out gcc for clang? :)13:19
jaegerhave you seen any discussion of that in here? :P13:19
prologicwell no13:20
prologicbut you never know :)13:20
teK__I hit some ( == teted a few an immedieatly hit a bug) ports that did not compile with clang13:20
jaegerllvm also tries to use clang if it finds it installed so we may have to be careful about that. not sure13:21
teK__llvm and llvm-clang are mutually exclusive13:21
jaegerohhh... weird13:22
jaegerI didn't expect you to do it that way but that explains the name13:22
jaegerok :)13:22
teK__you have to have  llvm in the build dir for clang to compile13:23
teK__at least I could not findanother solution/hints13:23
teK__so llvm-clang is the more economic way to have clang on your system13:23
juejaeger: no13:24
juejaeger: guess you have a modified port ready? If so, please commit it13:24
jaegerI figured that was the case but assumed (for no good reason, really) that you'd build a port that just downloads llvm and only installs the clang parts :)13:24
jaegerjue: sure, will do13:24
juejaeger: great, thanks13:25
jaegernp :)13:25
teK__jaeger: surely I could have deleted everyting except the clang parts (the binaries + man page?)13:26
jaegerDo we have a preference or policy on when to merge 3.0 into 3.1? I don't like the idea of merging every time I do a single 3.0 commit, makes for noisy logs13:26
teK__this way you have to build llvm 2 times13:26
jaegeryeah, it would be quite annoying to build13:26
teK__not that you cannot build llvm 10 times a day (like I did yesterday). But rest assured its not fun13:27
prologicif you want my opinion13:38
prologicwe should automate merging 3.0 into 3.113:38
jaegerNormally I like automating things but git merge automation sounds like a minefield13:39
prologicI was thinking of a tool that does:13:41
prologicif previous version of port and associated files match those of the newer branch (3.1) then apply a patch from the older branch to the newer branch13:41
teK__it just wont work13:41
teK__I am not up to implementing that.13:42
jaegerso you're thinking of automated cherry-picking more than automated merging13:42
prologicand I'm more than happy to write such a tool13:42
prologicit could be a git hook even13:42
frinnstis it really that big a deal? its just for a month per year, pretty much :)13:58
jueas frinnst said, merging the two branches isn't a big deal at all and any automated crap won't work IMO ;)17:36
teK__and I promise to never screw up branches17:37
juejaeger: but back to your question, I always try to accumulate some updates before I do a merge, especially for the opt repo17:38
jaegerjue: I feel the same way18:00
jaegersurprised we don't have an lxde repo, I see people talking about that now and then19:01

Generated by 2.11.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!