From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adolf Belka To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: jwhois appears to be no longer maintained Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2021 18:59:45 +0200 Message-ID: <3d994d24-bf61-a08c-0fef-96023e8063d1@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: <8F14DD31-1D66-42C1-80B3-88B288F5CFB7@ipfire.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5657298247290006910==" List-Id: --===============5657298247290006910== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Michael, On 04/08/2021 16:30, Michael Tremer wrote: > Hi, >=20 >> On 29 Jul 2021, at 21:01, Adolf Belka wrote: >> >> Hi Peter, >> >> So I have been able to successfully build the new whois and have installed= it into a vm and tested it out with an IP address and it worked giving the s= ame info as with jwhois on my production IPFire system. >> >> One thing that I am not sure about. With jwhois there are a lot of entries= in /etc/jwhois.conf and then there are a couple of patches in /src/patches a= dding more into jwhois.conf >> >> For the new whois the whois.conf is empty with just a note saying that if = the compiled in servers are not adequate then additional ones can be added to= the whois.conf. >> >> The format for the whois.conf is different from the jwhois.conf with the = =3D separator being replaced by a blank space. In jwhois there are also some = entries with two lines with the second line giving the query format which doe= s not look to be able to be used in whois.conf >> >> jwhois.conf says that the type can be either cidr or regex >> >> whois.conf says that each entry consists of a regex followed by the server= . There is no mention of cidr >> >> >> It is not clear to me if the entries in jwhois.conf and the two jwhois pat= ches need to be included into whois.conf but if they do then I need some help= about how to reconcile the differences. >=20 > We do not have any custom changes in our configuration. This was just what = we imported from somewhere else and I understood it as the standard set of se= rvers. >=20 > I suppose removing the old configuration and continuing with a fresh defaul= t configuration is the way to go. This is nice and easy then because this version of whois has its default set = compiled in, so the whois.conf is only used for additional servers that are d= ecided to be needed. I will submit this change as a patch of program as a patch then. Regards, Adolf. >=20 > -Michael >=20 >> >> Regards, >> >> Adolf. >> >> >> On 21/07/2021 12:10, Adolf Belka wrote: >>> Hi Peter, >>> >>> I haven't seen anyone else pick this up so I will give it a go and see ho= w I get on. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Adolf >>> >>> On 30/05/2021 12:01, Peter M=C3=BCller wrote: >>>> Hello development folks, >>>> >>>> looking at it's Git repository (https://github.com/jonasob/jwhois), jwho= is does not seem to be >>>> maintained anymore. It's last commit currently dates November 20th, 2015= , while the latest release >>>> was tagged on July 10th, 2005. >>>> >>>> Debian switched to another WHOIS client (https://github.com/rfc1036/whoi= s), being far more actively >>>> maintained than jwhois (see also: https://packages.debian.org/buster/who= is). From my point of view, >>>> we should to as well. >>>> >>>> Since I am currently short on spare time: Is someone volounteering to do= this for me? >>>> >>>> Whoever it will be, thank you. :-) >>>> >>>> Thanks, and best regards, >>>> Peter M=C3=BCller >=20 --===============5657298247290006910==--