Messages would get duplicated when you chat with yourself, worse if you
had omemo enabled the duplicated message would say something along the
lines of "Your client doesn't support OMEMO". The cause was carbons
when the message was sent from another client, whilst it was a sent
and received message when profanity was the one to send it. This commit
ignores the carbon message in the 1st case and ignores the received one
in the 2nd.
Fixes https://github.com/profanity-im/profanity/issues/1595
Profanity would ignore the silent nick change in some places. The roster
and history would show the correct nick, new messages from the current
user and the "Autojoined <jid> as <nick>" message would show the wrong
one. This commit fixes that problem.
Fixes https://github.com/profanity-im/profanity/issues/757
`/ox discover` segfaults on some misconfigured? nodes because there are
newlines before and after some pubkey-metadata stanzas so the newlines
get treated as seperate stanzas. This commit just skips each stanza in
public-keys-list that doesn't have a fingerprint.
Fixes https://github.com/profanity-im/profanity/issues/1713
We only want to have the decrypted message or the alternative body in
message->plain.
Also let's print error messages if it makes sense and log other issues.
Partly addresses the commit in the comit mesage of:
2dc0cc489c
Maybe we can make this configurable later.
So users have the freedom to be more strict.
This commit partly reverts 62018f48c5.
Example to edit trust level:
```
gpg --edit-key somekeyid
gpg (GnuPG) 2.3.4; Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
pub rsa4096/keyid
created: 2020-06-26 expires: 2022-06-26 usage: SC
trust: unknown validity: full
sub rsa4096/keyid
created: 2020-06-26 expires: 2022-06-26 usage: E
[ full ] (1). xmpp:user@domain.de
gpg> trust
pub rsa4096/keyid
created: 2020-06-26 expires: 2022-06-26 usage: SC
trust: unknown validity: full
sub rsa4096/keyid
created: 2020-06-26 expires: 2022-06-26 usage: E
[ full ] (1). xmpp:user@domain.de
Please decide how far you trust this user to correctly verify other users' keys
(by looking at passports, checking fingerprints from different sources, etc.)
1 = I don't know or won't say
2 = I do NOT trust
3 = I trust marginally
4 = I trust fully
5 = I trust ultimately
m = back to the main menu
Your decision? 3
pub rsa4096/keyid
created: 2020-06-26 expires: 2022-06-26 usage: SC
trust: marginal validity: full
sub rsa4096/keyid
created: 2020-06-26 expires: 2022-06-26 usage: E
[ full ] (1). xmpp:user@domain.de
Please note that the shown key validity is not necessarily correct
unless you restart the program.
gpg> quit
```
* Added logging messages (INFO if key can not be used)
* Check owner_trust < GPGME_VALIDITY_MARGINAL
The key can not be used if the owner_trust is less than MARGINAL.
@mdosch discovered that we now don't print `:` for messages from others
anymore.
Until
https://github.com/profanity-im/profanity/pull/1663#issuecomment-1114625151
is fixed lets restore the default behaviour to always add `:` in
`_win_print_internal()`.
The result will be that a stamp set to `-->` will also look like `-->:`.
Rotated log files will now be: `.local/share/profanity/logs/profanity.001.log`
We only use logrotation if we use the default log file ending with .log.
So Replacing the `.` should be fine.
User supplied log files are not rotated.
Fix https://github.com/profanity-im/profanity/issues/1693
```
@StefanKropp @DebXWoody please check `_handle_ox_chat()` I don't
understand what you are doing there.
1)
First plain is assigned `message->plain =
p_ox_gpg_decrypt(xmpp_stanza_get_text(ox));`
and then in the same if block you overwrite this with `message->plain =
xmpp_stanza_get_text(b);` without freeing the old value as far as I can
see.
2)
Sometimes even doing `message->plain = "OX error: No payload found";`.
Shouldn't there be a `strdup()`? I think later on we try to free the
whole message struct. So we can't mix this static things.
```
Asserting here is not the right thing to do at all.
A person could have a typo in the fingerprint. Or like in the case of
the reported bug just confuse the arguments.
An additional check for valid jid should be added later to the calling
function maybe.
Fix https://github.com/profanity-im/profanity/issues/1698
