On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Bret Busby <
bret.busby@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 15/10/2014, Bret Busby <
bret@busby.net> wrote:
>> 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 Bret's information is out of date.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 ]
>>>
>> ....................................................
>>
>
> And, in going to the web page at
>
http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/subscribe/alpine-info> as cited, and, thence, from that web page, following the link therein,
> within the sentence
> "To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the
> Alpine-info Archives."
> to the web page at
>
http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/alpine-info/> I find that the mailing list archive goes from September 2006, to October 2014.
>
> And, with
>
> "
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From:
alpine-info-request@mailman13.u.washington.edu> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 10:36:52 -0700
> Subject: Welcome to the "Alpine-info" mailing list
> To:
bret.busby@gmail.com>
> Welcome to the
Alpine-info@u.washington.edu mailing list!
>
> To post to this list, send your message to:
>
>
alpine-info@u.washington.edu>
> General information about the mailing list is at:
>
>
http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/alpine-info>
> "
>
> I must conclude that the post from "francis picabia" is a
> misinfomational troll.
A troll? WTF? Did you look at the links I included?
I don't manage that UW web site, dude. It is ancient, and I can't
be blamed for expecting sand to come out of such a tomb.
I resent a subscribe request and still no response. I am not making this up.
Try #3 is using the web page subscribe at your link, which behaves as if a
moderated subscribe.
Your link to the mailing list does work. There is no way I could
gain that link from the UW website.
There seems to be more relevant information at the tail of the page
for "alpine patches" where the 2.11 effort was announced in a google group:
http://patches.freeiz.com/Quote:
After the hosting of this site was concluded at UW, I had to find a new place to host my patches. I spent a lot of time trying to find the right place. I had to do a lot of research, particularly reading the agreement statements. I found many places that would require me to give the copyright of my contributions away to them, or that did not give me enough flexibility as to how I would control each page in the site (e.g the look of the page). Therefore, after "Patches for Alpine" was closed at UW it was not hosted by anyone else for about a month.
Currently this site is hosted by
www.000webhost.com. I thank them for hosting this site free of charge. I did an extensive search before I decided to sign up for this service, and I found this to be the best free service. I highly recommend it. Give it a try!
At the beginning of 2013 my efforts shifted. I am still writing patches, but the goal is to incorporate them in new versions of Alpine, which I started to maintain myself. Unfortunately, re-alpine was not moving forward, and its last release in December 2012 (version 2.03) had removed code only. Because there was not progress, I gathered many of my patches and released version 2.10 in January 2013. Seven months later, version 2.11 was released.
I can only interpret this to mean 2.11 is NOT a University of Washington effort.