The main changes are to explain how we use git branches, how we use
changes files, and what should go into a patch. Putting these in
HACKING means that we shouldn't need to constantly refer to the or-dev
emails where we explain this stuff.
what's happening here is that we're fetching certs for obsolete
authorities -- probably legacy signers in this case. but try to
remain general in the log message.
It's natural for the definition of bandwidth_rule_t to be with the functions
that actually care about its values. Unfortunately, this means declaring
bandwidth_rate_rule_to_string() out of sequence. Someday we'll just rename
reasons.c to strings.c, and put it at the end of or.h, and this will all be
better.
1) mingw doesn't have _vscprintf(); mingw instead has a working snprintf.
2) windows compilers that _do_ have a working _vscprintf spell it so; they do
not spell it _vcsprintf().
Works like the --enable-static-openssl/libevent options. Requires
--with-zlib-dir to be set. Note that other dependencies might still
pull in a dynamicly linked zlib, if you don't link them in statically
too.
Our code assumed that any version of OpenSSL before 0.9.8l could not
possibly require SSL_OP_ALLOW_UNSAFE_LEGACY_RENEGOTIATION. This is
so... except that many vendors have backported the flag from later
versions of openssl when they backported the RFC5476 renegotiation
feature.
The new behavior is particularly annoying to detect. Previously,
leaving SSL_OP_ALLOW_UNSAFE_LEGACY_RENEGOTIATION unset meant that
clients would fail to renegotiate. People noticed that one fast!
Now, OpenSSL's RFC5476 support means that clients will happily talk to
any servers there are, but servers won't accept renegotiation requests
from unpatched clients unless SSL_OP_ALLOW_etc is set. More fun:
servers send back a "no renegotiation for you!" error, which unpatched
clients respond to by stalling, and generally producing no useful
error message.
This might not be _the_ cause of bug 1346, but it is quite likely _a_
cause for bug 1346.
Everything that accepted the 'Circ' name handled it wrong, so even now
that we fixed the handling of the parameter, we wouldn't be able to
set it without making all the 0.2.2.7..0.2.2.10 relays act wonky.
This patch makes Tors accept the 'Circuit' name instead, so we can
turn on circuit priorities without confusing the versions that treated
the 'Circ' name as occasion to act weird.
I'm adding this because I can never remember what stuff like 'rule 3'
means. That's the one where if somebody goes limp or taps out, the
fight is over, right?
When you mean (a=b(c,d)) >= 0, you had better not say (a=b(c,d)>=0).
We did the latter, and so whenever CircPriorityHalflife was in the
consensus, it was treated as having a value of 1 msec (that is,
boolean true).
