From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Permerror (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2001:41d0:1:7a93::1; helo=nautica.notk.org; envelope-from=asmadeus@notk.org; receiver= Received: from nautica.notk.org (ipv6.notk.org [IPv6:2001:41d0:1:7a93::1]) by hurricane.the-brannons.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9681F77D9F for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 09:37:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by nautica.notk.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id F2781C009; Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:38:08 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:37:53 +0100 From: Dominique Martinet To: Chuck Hallenbeck Cc: Karl Dahlke , edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com Message-ID: <20180129173753.GA19481@nautica> References: <20180029110359.eklhad@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [Edbrowse-dev] Curl library error X-BeenThere: edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Edbrowse Development List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:37:52 -0000 Chuck Hallenbeck wrote on Mon, Jan 29, 2018: > If I decide to backtrack, it makes sense to do so stepping backward a > day at a time until I can once more access that site. But what would > that tell us? If you're up for it, git has a 'bisect' command where it goes halfway in history everytime and you tell it if the commit works or doesn't work. (If required you can also tell it "this commit doesn't work for a different reason and I cannot test", which will give you another commit close-ish to test again) That will tell you precisely which commit changed the behavior and we can look into it. But first, please make sure going back to some old version like the commit Karl pointed at makes it work again -- I tried on a slightly outdated archlinux (last upgrade is two weeks old) and it works just fine, so your problem could be due to some system upgrade instead. Or, since you're pointing at the https version, it could be a TLS problem.... But we should get that too in that case, it is odd. -- Dominique