Add a method to configure when neither GNOME or KDE are available

[GoogleCodeExporter]

If I use an independent WM, like fluxbox, or even when I'm running from the 
console, I would expect the configuration to come from *somewhere*.

~/.proxy.conf was serving that purpose, but now it's gone. IMO it should come 
back until there's an alternative like dconf or something.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by felipe.contreras on 17 Jun 2010 at 7:52

[GoogleCodeExporter]

In case you're not running gnome or kde, then the 'default' fallback to envvar 
(which is what linux used for the last decades) is used and offers the 
functionality required.

Isn't that working as expected?

Original comment by dominiqu...@gmail.com on 17 Jun 2010 at 8:05

• Changed state: NeedInfo

[GoogleCodeExporter]

No, I don't want to change the environment variable in all my terminals 
whenever I switch network.

Original comment by felipe.contreras on 17 Jun 2010 at 8:18

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Not to mention there are background services like packagekit (yum will use 
libproxy soon)... how am I supposed change the proxy for them?

Original comment by felipe.contreras on 17 Jun 2010 at 8:19

[GoogleCodeExporter]

PackageKit has a rather broken implementation of proxy handling anyway. If this 
is not fundamentally restructured, you won't have luck with it.

libproxy reads user session settings. PK (and thus also yum) run as root. 
Typically not, what your session has configured.

PK forwards the proxy from the user session to the root account with some 
polkit magic, but it's far from 'working'... 

Original comment by dominiqu...@gmail.com on 8 Jul 2010 at 12:11

[GoogleCodeExporter]

OK, then I could sudo and change the system libproxy config and use that 
instead of GNOME's.

Moreover, what happens if i'm not using KDE or GNOME, but fluxbox, or just the 
console?

/etc/proxy.conf and ~/.config/proxy.conf solve the problems perfectly.

Original comment by felipe.contreras on 8 Jul 2010 at 12:34

[GoogleCodeExporter]

If you're not using gnome or kde, then libproxy does the same as linux did for 
the last decade: it uses envvar.

Original comment by dominiqu...@gmail.com on 8 Jul 2010 at 6:59

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Which is not improvement at all!

Applications are already using envvar, so what would libproxy bring?

Say I use fluxbox, and I switch to my company's VPN, now I need to use a proxy.

With libproxy, I can edit /etc/proxy.conf, and Firefox, yum, xchat, pidgin 
would work.

Without libproxy, I have to edit /etc/yum.conf, manually configure Firefox, 
edit ~/.xchat2/xchat.conf, and ~/.purple/prefs.xml.

If you remove the support for /etc/proxy.config, then I would also need to: 
edit /etc/yum.conf, manually configure Firefox, edit ~/.xchat2/xchat.conf, and 
~/.purple/prefs.xml.

See? No improvement at all.

What baffles me is that you already got it right at the beginning and now you 
are going back to square one.

Original comment by felipe.contreras on 8 Jul 2010 at 7:59

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Of course not an improvement, but also no regression on those systems.

The 'problem' with a config file is the priorization in case of a gnome session 
for example: what's higher? the config file or the gnome session config?

we are aware that a config file is a nice addon, but it's not as simple to get 
it all right as it sounds (the awareness is also the reason why this bug for 
example was not just rejected but is still open).

Original comment by dominiqu...@gmail.com on 8 Jul 2010 at 9:37

• Changed state: New

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Right, it's not a regression, but you are asking people to use libproxy without 
bringing any improvements? I don't think that will fly.

If you don't have a libproxy config file, then obviously GConf is higher.

If you have a libproxy config file, then that takes precedence, and in the 
config file the user should be able to specify the priorities of each method.

Original comment by felipe.contreras on 9 Jul 2010 at 4:38

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Let me put in my $0.02.  In almost every case on modern Linux, NetworkManager 
is used for network connectivity (even on servers).  IMHO, proxy settings 
should go in NetworkManager and libproxy should read them from there.  This 
would permit per-connection proxy settings in a much more sane way than the 
current implementation (in GNOME).  It would also be cross-desktop and would 
solve the problem of the fluxbox user and eliminate the need for a config file 
(config files should almost never be seen as an improvement).

Original comment by npmccallum@gmail.com on 9 Jul 2010 at 5:09

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Not everyone uses NetworkManager, and not everyone uses a graphical UI.

For the ones that do, sure, a config file should not be needed.

But for the rest, a config file might be pretty much the only option.

Besides, while PackageKit gets fixed, a config file would also do the deed.

Original comment by felipe.contreras on 9 Jul 2010 at 9:17

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I've created a new ticket status (PatchWanted) and updated this case.  I agree 
it would be nice to have this feature, but there are more important things for 
us to work on.  A cleanly written patch will be accepted and merged.

Original comment by npmccallum@gmail.com on 9 Jul 2010 at 9:29

• Changed state: PatchWanted
• Added labels: OpSys-Linux, Type-Enhancement
• Removed labels: Type-Defect

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Just as a 'side' not here: There is a config_sysconfig module, which was 
proposed and merged by the openSUSE project (it's per default only active for 
user root).

It uses the file /etc/sysconfig/proxy, which exists on any SUSE based system.

For not causing trouble with user sessions, this config module though is 
skipped for non-root users. For root users it has precendence over anything 
else, as root never has (or should have) a gnome or kde session)

Of course that does not yet solve the 'fluxbox' usecase, But it does address 
the 'system service' usecase from comment 3.

Original comment by dominiqu...@gmail.com on 12 Aug 2011 at 6:26

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hello there,

I thought that libproxy would help me with the problem (or scenario) I have, 
and instead of that I stumbled upon this ticket where you guys kept telling 
more than once something like "the same as linux did for the last decade: it 
uses envvar"...

Oh well, let me tell you about my use case:
I have to setup a linux server hosted appliance (web server based 
http://www.redmine.org for instance) inside a virtual machine in a corporate 
environment. Until I'm experimenting, I managed to get Firefox from inside that 
virtual guest to connect to the internet via the corporate PAC URL. Of course, 
I could also just set some proxy server from the PAC file in env_vars for 
having console apps working with the proxy, but imagine that PAC file is 
several pages long, different destinations have to be routed differently. So 
I'd actually need libproxy being able to use PAC, without forcing me to even 
install a desktop environment, mozillolloida or anything like that on this 
virtual server (which I finally won't, because it's a server), for being able 
to maintain the packages (one example beeing wget patched to use libproxy) of 
that system via SSH console only. Is there any way to achieve that, did I miss 
some possibility?
Thanks in advance,
Lucian

Original comment by lmuresa...@gmail.com on 17 Apr 2012 at 11:14

[GoogleCodeExporter]

export http_proxy=wpad://

or

export http_proxy=pac+http://path/to.pac

Original comment by nathan...@themccallums.org on 17 Apr 2012 at 2:07

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Thanks Nathan for your reply, that helps further, but it's still not working, I 
found out that on my system (Gentoo) libproxy-0.4.7 wasn't even built with any 
pacrunner support, so I rebuilt it with webkit support, if I'm trying the proxy 
utility shipped with libproxy now I'm getting this:

_PX_DEBUG=1 http_proxy=pac+http://proxyconf._MY_COMPANY_.net/  proxy 
http://libproxy.googlecode.com/files/libproxy-0.4.7.tar.gz
Using config: 23envvar_config_extension
Using ignore:
Config is: pac+http://proxyconf._MY_COMPANY_.net/
PAC received!
Using pacrunner: 26webkit_pacrunner_extension
Pacrunner returned:
direct://

Maybe you can suggest how to debug this more thoroughly?

Original comment by lmuresa...@gmail.com on 17 Apr 2012 at 3:42

[GoogleCodeExporter]

So, after further testing I found that the "pac+http" scheme works. I also 
improved the wget patch found in the opensuse bugtracker to actually make use 
of this, I will polish it a bit more and send upstream wget. Actually I might 
try to do the same for aria2c and git. Possibly subversion might support this 
via neon, I've got to investigate this.

However, I've got one more question, is "pac+http" the only scheme supported in 
libproxy for direct PAC retrieval? I found that "pac+https" and "pac+ftp" is 
not able to download the PAC file served over https or ftp:

Schnappi libproxy-0.4.7 # _PX_DEBUG=1 ftp_proxy=pac+ftp://localhost/proxy.pac 
proxy ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/ls-lR.gz
Using config: 23envvar_config_extension
Using ignore:
Config is: pac+ftp://localhost/proxy.pac
Unable to download PAC!
direct://
Schnappi libproxy-0.4.7 # _PX_DEBUG=1 ftp_proxy=pac+https://localhost/proxy.pac 
proxy ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/ls-lR.gz
Using config: 23envvar_config_extension
Using ignore:
Config is: pac+https://localhost/proxy.pac
Unable to download PAC!
direct://
Schnappi libproxy-0.4.7 # _PX_DEBUG=1 ftp_proxy=pac+http://localhost/proxy.pac 
proxy ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/ls-lR.gz
Using config: 23envvar_config_extension
Using ignore:
Config is: pac+http://localhost/proxy.pac
PAC received!
Using pacrunner: 26webkit_pacrunner_extension
Pacrunner returned: PROXY ftp-proxy.t-online.de
http://ftp-proxy.t-online.de

Original comment by lmuresa...@gmail.com on 18 Apr 2012 at 1:02

[GoogleCodeExporter]

The RFC draft for WPAD only specifies HTTP. I'm not aware of any software 
package which uses HTTPS or FTP.

Original comment by nathan...@themccallums.org on 18 Apr 2012 at 2:42

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Thanks, that clarifies it.

Original comment by lmuresa...@gmail.com on 18 Apr 2012 at 3:49