[tor-talk] torsocks is broken and unmaintained

[Nick Mathewson]

On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:23 PM, Matthew Finkel <matthew.finkel at gmail.com>wrote:

> On 11/03/2012 08:38 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>
 [...]

> > Okay, sounds like we've got some enthusiasm.  Let's get started.  I
> > volunteer to review commits and if people ask me to, and suggest that
> > asking me to review stuff for a while might be a smart idea.  I just gave
> > myself commit access to the git at git-rw.torproject.org repo too, in case
> > that helps.  I am not planning to be a primary author here.
>
> Thanks for adding one more thing to your plate! I know Jake can handle
> this but the more eyes we have looking at these initial changes the
> better it'll be.
>
> >
> > Given the amount of people asking us to apply and/or warning us that we
> > mustn't apply particular patches, I'm going to suggest the following
> > principles for a while:
> >   * LET'S START MINIMAL.  Let's stick to doing only the very major
> bugfixes
> > and obvious fixes for at least the next release or two, so that something
> > usable comes out.
>
> Agreed. To be honest, I haven't really looked at the code too much, so
> I'll start diving into that in a bit. (If there isn't one already...I
> haven't checked) Can we get a trac component added so we can track
> progress and such?


Done.  At some point we should migrate issues from google code, but IMO
that's best done once we have something nontrivial to show for our efforts.


> >   * NO ARCHITECTURAL ASTRONAUTICS. I'm always tempted when I come to a
> > codebase for the first time to refactor the heck out of it.  Let's avoid
> > doing that till we have a little experience with this codebase.  There
> > isn't all that much here: let's
>
> Yes...let's! :)
>
> Was there supposed to be more to that sentence?


Yeah; sometimes I start a sentence, then I think of something to write
elsewhere and start another sentence, but then by the time I'm done with
that one I don't remember the first sentence any more, so it

That one should end with "There isn't all that much code here; let's make
sure we understand it pretty thoroughly before we complexify it in the name
of some half-glimpsed vision."



> >   * LOVE MEANS GET TESTED. If at all possible, we should make this
> codebase
> > easier to test (right now it wants you to install before testing), and
> > improve the coverage of the tests so that (if as people suspect) we're
> > likely to break things on one platform when we fix them on another, we
> can
> > at least find out fast whether a patch works everywhere.
> >
>
> Certainly sounds like a good idea. I'm going to have to familiarize
> myself with some of the other *nix platforms it does/should support.
> Just looking through the current issues on google code, for example, I
> don't know the internals of OSX well enough *yet* to know if [1] is even
> possible. But once we've compiled a list of all the current critical
> patches, Debian and others (assuming such a list doesn't exist already),
> then we start applying, testing, revising, etc. :)
>
> [1] https://code.google.com/p/torsocks/issues/detail?id=41


Hm. Supposedly, it's _supposed_ to work on OSX.  It has a lot of code for
OSX support.  I just tried it with curl on my osx laptop, and it seemed to
work okay.

-- 
Nick