Re: [9front] Netsurf 3.9 for Plan 9 (work in progress)

[jamos@oboj.net]

Hi Eli,

The new Github repos by Ori are not yet completely up to date with my 
changes. I am new to Git which makes things slower. For the impatient 
there is still my old tar-ball, updated with a slightly more efficient 
redrawing:

https://webbkurs.ei.hv.se/~imjam/plan9/netsurf-3.9-2020-01-24.tgz

Also, I've compiled a list of changes that I had to make to the source 
in order to make it compile on 9front. People here might have ideas on 
how to solve these issues more elegantly than I do now.

https://webbkurs.ei.hv.se/~imjam/plan9/port_ns39.txt

Now, to your problem. I think you should be able to clone with git:// 
without having any key, and that is how you got the nsport repo.

A learnt that a good way of testing if your ssh-key works properly, is 
to run a 'ssh git@github.com' If it works, it would greet you something 
like:

"Hi <yourgithubname>! You've successfully authenticated, but GitHub does 
not provide shell access."

If it doesn't work you would instead get a message that is very similar 
to the error you describe. Does the key in your factotum work to ssh 
into other Unix machines?

I made my key pair using the instructions in section 8.4.6.3.1 in the 
FQA. Then I uploaded the file 'key.pub' to my Github account, and copied 
the file 'key' (the private key) to my factotum.

/Jonas


On 2020-01-25 17:11, Eli Cohen wrote:

> I'm having all kinds of problems checking this out.
> 
> nsport/fetch clone fails with:
> ssh: auth: no key matches proto=rsa service=ssh role=client
> 
> I have verified there is a key in factotum
> 
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 10:41 AM <jamos@oboj.net> wrote:
> I just committed the first changes to the git repo that Ori kindly set
> up for the Plan 9 port of Netsurf. I have checked in the files for the
> smallest and simplest library (libwapcaplet) as a test, using git9 by
> Ori. I will continue with the other libraries, and the browser itself.
> Each library is in it's own repo on Github. I'll write again when I
> managed to commit the rest.
> 
> For the curious, you can help me to see if I did everything correctly,
> by checking out and compiling the 'libwapcaplet' library. This is my
> first real Git experience :-)
> 
> git/clone git://github.com/netsurf-plan9/libwapcaplet.git
> 
> Kyle> I have something partially working with webfs
> 
> This is super cool! If you feel for it, it would be interesting to read
> about your efforts and the
> problems you encountered.
> 
> /Jonas
> 
> On 2020-01-24 20:16, Kyle Nusbaum wrote:
> 
> I am away from home for the next week and didn't bring the code with
> me.
> 
> I have been hacking on it in my spare time and made some progress. It's
> not pretty yet, but it's actually minimally useful (to me at least). I
> will try to get some repos set up on GitHub when I get back if someone
> wants to look at what I've done.
> 
> On January 24, 2020 3:09:57 AM EST, Eli Cohen <echoline@gmail.com>
> wrote: bump. did anyone ever put repositories of this up yet? don't let
> them
> shout you down
> 
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 8:26 PM Kyle Nusbaum <knusbaum@sdf.org> wrote:
> Attachment didn't take. My mistake.
> 
> On January 7, 2020 10:23:40 PM CST, Kyle Nusbaum <knusbaum@sdf.org>
> wrote: I gave up trying talking directly on /net/tcp. It is a pointless
> exercise and would need to be replaced right away anyway.
> 
> I have something partially working with webfs. I replaced the   llcache
> 
> implementation with one that uses webfs. We still need the old
    version

>> to handle objects like "resources:quirks.css" etc.
>> 
>> I'll keep working on it when I get time.
>> I'm attaching a screenshot of the thing partially rendering the
    netsurf

> website.
> 
> On January 4, 2020 3:33:48 PM CST, jamos@oboj.net wrote: On 2020-01-04
> 19:14, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> 
> What I'd do is clone the upstream netsurf repos onto any git host
> that you feel like (except gitlab -- git9 triggers a bug in their
> backend, and I haven't had time to find a workaround), and then
> branch off a 'plan9' branch that we can work on, and commit the
> current state.
> That sounds like a cool way, but I am kind of a git rookie. I
    assume

> that the reason to clone the main repository is that it will be
    easier

> to merge them together eventually? Or even to keep the plan 9
    branch

> up
> to date with new versions of the mainline? I have based my port on
    the

> stable release 3.9 while the core team is happily hacking away on
    what

> even will be the next release (usually one version per year).
> 
> The official site has many git repositories
> (https://source.netsurf-browser.org) - from which I actually downloaded
> every support library separately. Each repository has a tag for
    each

> release. There are also a number of branches (especially for the
    main

> netsurf repository:
> https://source.netsurf-browser.org/netsurf.git/refs/heads) that
    looks

> like experiments.
> 
> I might be inclined to keep it simple to begin with, but if there
    are

> very compelling reasons for a more elaborate way, I might be open
    to

> that, in order to avoid lots of work later on.
> -- Kyle

-- Kyle
-- Kyle