[tor-relays] Caching new entry debian-tor...

[Tristan]

Well, according to this question I asked on Tor's StackExchange, version
0.2.4.26 is still technically in the recommended consensus.

At any rate, running an older version is better for diversity, isn't it?

On Sep 21, 2016 2:13 AM, "shraptor" <shraptor at bahnhof.se> wrote:

> On 2016-09-20 20:58, Roger Dingledine wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:20:03PM +0200, shraptor wrote:
>>
>>> What's up with these messages I get in tor-arm and log?
>>>
>>> Caching new entry debian-tor for debian-tor [62 duplicates hidden]
>>>
>>> What is tor doing??
>>>
>>> Sep 20 19:10:21.000 [notice] Caching new entry debian-tor for debian-tor
>>>
>>
>> It looks like this notice-level entry was changed to an info-level entry
>> starting in Tor 0.2.7.1-alpha:
>>
>
> ...
>
>
>> So it looks like you are running an old version of Tor? You should
>> upgrade and the line should go away. In any case it should be harmless.
>>
>
>
> Yeah well I'm running on rpi3 and it says in tor-arm that 0.2.5 is the
> recommended
> version for this architecture.
>
> Anyway I checked out your public repo's of armhf compiled tor packages.
> These packages are unfortunately dependent on libsystemd that is not
> welcome on my systems.
> I am running devuan as OS.
>
> So I have looked into building a newer version myself but it is a bit of
> jungle
> to setup the tool chain for me.
>
>
> I hadn't noticed this log-message before and had some trouble with my
> relay so felt the need to seek information.
>
> /scooby
> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20160921/3f7fc0bd/attachment.html>