Re: alpine status?
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2014, Bret Busby wrote:
>
>> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:35:47
>> From: Bret Busby <bret@busby.net>
>> To: debian-user <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
>> Subject: Re: alpine status?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 14 Oct 2014, francis picabia wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Bret Busby <bret.busby@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 04/09/2014, Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Can anyone confirm if development continues on alpine?
>>>>> I am getting mixed messages about this, one from my web hosting
>>>>> company
>>>>> suggesting I join the developer's list, and another from an end user
>>>>> claiming that development no longer exists.
>>>>> Thanks much,
>>>>> Karen
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest that you visit
>>>> http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/alpine-info
>>>> and subscribe to that mailing list, and, post your query there.
>>>>
>>>> I believe that you would find that development of alpine, is alive and
>>>> well, and, that list includes the developers.
>>>>
>>>> I believe that the version of alpine that I use, is 2.00, running on
>>>> Debian 6.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bret's information is out of date.
>>>
>>> There is no life at the University of Washington project.
>>> The mailing list archives are gone. A subscribe request
>>> goes unanswered. There is a Debian bug report
>>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687582
>>> and no progress on that for a couple of years.
>>> This is actually my incentive for looking into this - I run
>>> into this bug every day.
>>>
>>> re-alpine is a new project taking over the alpine effort.
>>> However, the latest files there are from 2012, so I wonder
>>> how active this project is.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> See message below.
>>
>> It is from the alpine mailing list to which I referred, which has
>> distributed messages this month, and, the message below, refers to ongoing
>> development of alpine.
>>
>> If you do not believe me, that the alpine mailing list is still active,
>> send a message direct to the poster of the message below, asking about the
>> mailing list.
>>
>> --
>> Bret Busby
>> Armadale
>> West Australia
>> ..............
>>
>> "So once you do know what the question actually is,
>> you'll know what the answer means."
>> - Deep Thought,
>> Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
>> "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
>> A Trilogy In Four Parts",
>> written by Douglas Adams,
>> published by Pan Books, 1992
>> ....................................................
>>
>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2014, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 07:40:53
>>> From: Eduardo Chappa <chappa@gmx.com>
>>
>>
>>> Cc: alpine-info@u.washington.edu
>>> Subject: Re: [Alpine-info] Signing problems
>>>
>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2014, Gregory Heytings wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi list,
>>> > > I try to sign emails with Alpine (latest version, 2.11).
>>>
>>> Gregory,
>>>
>>> Neither Alpine 2.11 nor previous versions, are very good at doing
>>> S/MIME. Please try the latest alpha version to see if that makes a
>>> difference with you.
>>> You can get it at
>>>
>>> http://patches.freeiz.com/alpine/alpha/release/
>>>
>>> (I am working out a few minor bugs in that release, and adding new
>>> features at this time.)
>>>
>>> Now, in regards to verifying signatures. Well, that is a complex issue.
>>> There are many ways in which a signed message can fail to verify. Some of
>>> these
>>> ways are predictable, and the latest alpha pre-release attempts up to 8
>>> strategies to verify a signed message before it gives up in verifying the
>>> signature.
>>> There are ways to add more strategies, but the total number of strategies
>>> Alpine can do increases exponentially (in powers of 2) when a new strategy
>>> is
>>> added. Again, it is hard to guess why a specific message does not verify,
>>> but it you are willing to share an example with me, I might help you
>>> understand
>>> why alpine 2.11 fails to verify it.
>>>
>>> In regards to what to do with the .p12 comodo certificate, this is now
>>> included in the S/MIME help of Alpine, and so let me quote the text:
>>>
>>> <HELP>
>>> In order to create a private key use the command
>>>
>>> openssl pkcs12 -in certificate.p12 -out your@address.com.key
>>>
>>> In order to create a public certificate use the command
>>>
>>> openssl pkcs12 -in certificate.p12 -clcerts -nokeys -out
>>> your@address.com.crt
>>>
>>> In order to create a certificate authority certificate use the command
>>>
>>> openssl pkcs12 -in certificate.p12 -cacerts -nokeys -out
>>> certificate-ca.crt
>>> </HELP>
>>>
>>> I hope this helps.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Eduardo
>>> http://patches.freeiz.com/alpine/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Alpine-info mailing list
>>> Alpine-info@u.washington.edu
>>> http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/alpine-info
>>>
>>> [ Note: This message contains email list management information ]
>>>
>> ....................................................
>>
>
> Oh, and the last message that I have receivd from the alpine mailing list to
> which I have referred, bears the datestamp of Friday 10 October 2014.
>
> The above message posted to the Debian Users mailing list, stating that my
> "information is out of date", is a bit like stating, on another list, that
> the Debian Project does not exist anymore, and that the Debian Users mailing
> list does not exist anymore.
Your information carries no specifics as to exactly what
project you are referring to. Are you referring to the
University of Washington Alpine project, or something else?
I'm seeing this...
No releases since 2008:
http://www.washington.edu/alpine/changes.html
(Six years at this point)
Broken mailman links on the mailing list page:
http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/pipermail/alpine-info
Links to very old packages (e.g. Debian 4)
http://www.washington.edu/alpine/acquire/
I have no response to a subscribe request sent to:
alpine-info-subscribe@mailman.u.washington.edu
hours ago.
Why am I to believe this is project is alive and current?
Please post a link to the mailing list archives. Every link I find
about it is 404.
Reply to: