[ITP] git-crypt 0.6.0

[Nick Nauwelaerts]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Turney [mailto:jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk]
> Sent: Sunday, December 1, 2019 16:06
> To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com; Nick Nauwelaerts
> <nick.nauwelaerts@aquafin.be>
> Subject: Re: [ITP] git-crypt 0.6.0
>
> >> On 2019-08-08 22:17, Nick Nauwelaerts wrote:
> >>> git-crypt is a git plugin that transparently handles encryption/decryption
> >>> of files in combination with git. i've used it on and off again when i need
> >>> to place sensitive info on a location that could be public (or as most ppl
> >>> seem to use it: to save dotfiles on github without all your private stuff
> >>> being world readable). i've been using it sporadicly in cygwin for 2
> months
> >>> as well without any issues.
> >>>
> >>> as such i made a cygport of it, but i'm not quite clear on how the process
> >>> works to submit it.
>
> Thanks.  Sorry for the delay in getting to this.
>
> Some minor comments on the cygport file:
>
> > # runtime deps to go in setup.hint, and note the escaped newline
> > REQUIRES="git openssl"
>
> The part of the comment about escaped newline doesn't make a lot of sense.

true that, seems to be a mindless copy/paste from:
https://github.com/cygwinports/cygport/blob/master/data/sample.cygport

> Are you sure that 'openssl' is required at runtime (and not just
> libssl1.1, which is autodetected as a dependency)?

excellent question.
after reviewing the contents of both packages it seems the openssl package contains all userland tools & manuals, while libssl contains the libraries only. looking throug the code git-crypt does not seem to use the actual openssl command, but the linux distros (opensuse & debian) i partially based this on all required full openssl. i'll look into it.

> > # We use the src_compile and src_test provided by meson.cygclass
>
> This comment is confusing since it's built with make?

also to much copy/paste from sample.cygport

> > i figured if i made the cygport file and patches available you would
> > import them in a build system like suse's openbuild to verify that no
> > shortcuts were taken or my system was otherwise not comparable to
> > normal install. come to think of it, kinda like what is proposed
> > here: https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2019-08/msg00012.html :)
>
> Unfortunately, we do not (yet) have a system to build packages from
> those repositories.
> > since i didn't bother with requesting access upload ofcourse fails,
> > also making announce irrelevant. i'll will send an email with a key
> > in the requested mail format asap.
>
> I don't see an email with a key from you.  If you are still interested
> in progressing this, please provide a ssh key as per
> https://cygwin.com/package-upload.html

i think there also was a question to provide 32bit packages in addition to the 64bit ones. since i haven't yet have had time for that i figured requesting a key for a half finished package was bad form.



bottom line:
 * i'll fix the confusing comments now (-> done)
 *¨i'll test to see if libssl suffices instead of openssl
 * not sure if i should request a key alrdy since 32bit testing most likely won't be happening the coming few weeks. can you drop me a private note with if i should or shouldn't alrdy request a key?


thx


 // nick

________________________________

Volg Aquafin op Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/AquafinNV> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/aquafinnv> | YouTube<http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCk_4P5BJ-MtEEDCkCsR_KqQ?feature=mhee> | LinkedIN<http://www.linkedin.com/company/aquafin/products> | Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/aquafin_nv/>

In het kader van de uitoefening van onze taken verzamelen we bij Aquafin persoonsgegevens. Hoe we omgaan met deze gegevens en wat de rechten van de betrokkenen zijn, kan je nalezen in onze privacy policy<https://www.aquafin.be/nl-be/privacy-policy>.

  P Denk aan het milieu. Druk deze mail niet onnodig af.