1:39 p.m.
Hey list,
I'm trying to figure out how to get Google OAuth2 credentials in the
hands of SyncEvolution on a headless Ubuntu server. I considered
installing gnome-online-accounts but that pulled in a metric crapload of
dependencies I'd rather not install. Copying the GOA databases from my
desktop to the server didn't work either. Is there any other way I can
hand a token to SyncEvolution? I know I can generate a token on the
server -- google-cl does it too.
Any ideas?
Emile
11:29 p.m.
On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 20:39 +0000, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
Hey list,
I'm trying to figure out how to get Google OAuth2 credentials in the
hands of SyncEvolution on a headless Ubuntu server. I considered
installing gnome-online-accounts but that pulled in a metric crapload
of dependencies I'd rather not install. Copying the GOA databases from
my desktop to the server didn't work either.
SyncEvolution cannot use those databases directly, it needs GOA
installed and available via D-Bus.
Is there any other way I can hand a token to SyncEvolution? I know
I
can generate a token on the server -- google-cl does it too.
Technically it would be possible to start the authentication on the
headless server, run the authentication dialog in a web browser on a
desktop, and then use the authorization token on the server.
But this is not implemented in GOA, gSSO or Ubuntu Online Accounts (UOA)
and therefore not available to SyncEvolution.
In other words, I am not aware of a way to do this at the moment. I
suggest that you bring this up with the maintainers of the different
OAuth2 implementations. Copy me if you want.
The use case is similar to running OAuth2 on an embedded device with no
or only a limited UI. I doubt that GOA is targeting that. You might have
more luck with gSSO or UOA.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
11:54 p.m.
On 04/24/2014 09:29 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote:
[...]
The use case is similar to running OAuth2 on an embedded device with
no
or only a limited UI. I doubt that GOA is targeting that. You might have
more luck with gSSO or UOA.
It's possible to inject an oauth token into UOA so that syncevolution
will use it. However, I'm not sure of how many dependencies are required
to have this working in Ubuntu Server. The packages you definitely need are:
syncevolution-provider-uoa
account-plugin-google
account-plugin-tools
You can try and see if the amount of dependencies brought in by these
packages is acceptable. If it is, please let me know and I'll try to
guide you further.
Ciao,
Alberto
1:11 a.m.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Alberto Mardegan <
alberto.mardegan(a)canonical.com> wrote:
It's possible to inject an oauth token into UOA so that syncevolution
will use it. However, I'm not sure of how many dependencies are required
to have this working in Ubuntu Server. The packages you definitely need
are:
syncevolution-provider-uoa
account-plugin-google
account-plugin-tools
You can try and see if the amount of dependencies brought in by these
packages is acceptable. If it is, please let me know and I'll try to
guide you further.
It brings in a huge number (182), but most of them acceptable... but doing
so it wants to uninstall syncevolution-activesync,
syncevolution-activesync-saucy and syncevolution-bundle.
Regards,
Emile
1:23 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 10:11 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Alberto Mardegan
<alberto.mardegan(a)canonical.com> wrote:
It's possible to inject an oauth token into UOA so that
syncevolution
will use it. However, I'm not sure of how many dependencies
are required
to have this working in Ubuntu Server. The packages you
definitely need are:
syncevolution-provider-uoa
account-plugin-google
account-plugin-tools
You can try and see if the amount of dependencies brought in
by these
packages is acceptable. If it is, please let me know and I'll
try to
guide you further.
It brings in a huge number (182), but most of them acceptable... but
doing so it wants to uninstall syncevolution-activesync,
syncevolution-activesync-saucy and syncevolution-bundle.
Are you on Ubuntu 14.4 LTS (aka Trusty)?
Ubuntu started using SyncEvolution for syncing in 14.4. What you are
seeing is probably the intentional conflict between the distro's
"syncevolution" package and syncevolution.org's
"syncevolution-bundle".
Normally, one can switch back and forth between these, but not if some
other components explicitly depend on "syncevolution". I'm not sure
whether I should allow syncevolution.org packages to replace
"syncevolution" without uninstalling these other components, because
there is no guarantee that syncevolution.org packages were compiled as
needed by the distro.
Actually, at the moment they aren't: syncevolution.org packages do not
have UOA support, while the Ubuntu packages do.
I guess I will have to change this, because eventually Ubuntu users will
hopefully want to try out more recent versions of SyncEvolution.
Renato, what do you think?
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
2:14 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 10:11 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Alberto Mardegan
> <alberto.mardegan(a)canonical.com> wrote:
>
>
> It's possible to inject an oauth token into UOA so that
> syncevolution
> will use it. However, I'm not sure of how many dependencies
> are required
> to have this working in Ubuntu Server. The packages you
> definitely need are:
> syncevolution-provider-uoa
> account-plugin-google
> account-plugin-tools
>
> You can try and see if the amount of dependencies brought in
> by these
> packages is acceptable. If it is, please let me know and I'll
> try to
> guide you further.
>
>
> It brings in a huge number (182), but most of them acceptable... but
> doing so it wants to uninstall syncevolution-activesync,
> syncevolution-activesync-saucy and syncevolution-bundle.
Are you on Ubuntu 14.4 LTS (aka Trusty)?
I've upgraded, yes, because syncevolution-provider-uoa wasn't in 13.10.
Ubuntu started using SyncEvolution for syncing in 14.4. What you are
seeing is probably the intentional conflict between the distro's
"syncevolution" package and syncevolution.org's
"syncevolution-bundle".
Normally, one can switch back and forth between these, but not if some
other components explicitly depend on "syncevolution". I'm not sure
whether I should allow syncevolution.org packages to replace
"syncevolution" without uninstalling these other components, because
there is no guarantee that syncevolution.org packages were compiled as
needed by the distro.
Actually, at the moment they aren't: syncevolution.org packages do not
have UOA support, while the Ubuntu packages do.
I guess I will have to change this, because eventually Ubuntu users will
hopefully want to try out more recent versions of SyncEvolution.
Renato, what do you think?
I'm fine with switching to the ubuntu-provided ones. Should I do this?
On another tack, what is considered gsso in ubuntu? Is that 'signond'?
Emile
2:27 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 11:14 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
I'm fine with switching to the ubuntu-provided ones. Should I do
this?
You will loose ActiveSync functionality, because that is not compiled by
the distro. For experiments with UOA and Google Calendar/Contacts it
should be okay to switch.
On another tack, what is considered gsso in ubuntu? Is that
'signond'?
It is signond + libaccounts + libsignon-glib (and friends). See
https://launchpad.net/online-accounts
"gSSO" is a reimplementation of signond in C based on glib. It also uses
a new OAuth2 implementation and thus has a slightly different API; it
gets used via a forked version of libsignon-glib. See
https://01.org/gsso
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
2:35 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 11:14 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> I'm fine with switching to the ubuntu-provided ones. Should I do this?
You will loose ActiveSync functionality, because that is not compiled by
the distro. For experiments with UOA and Google Calendar/Contacts it
should be okay to switch.
Ah. Clear. No, I want to keep activesync.
> On another tack, what is considered gsso in ubuntu? Is that
'signond'?
It is signond + libaccounts + libsignon-glib (and friends). See
https://launchpad.net/online-accounts
"gSSO" is a reimplementation of signond in C based on glib. It also uses
a new OAuth2 implementation and thus has a slightly different API; it
gets used via a forked version of libsignon-glib. See
https://01.org/gsso
Installing signond and libaccounts-glib-tools pulls in a mere 32 others,
so that
would seem to be the way to go. These two should trigger the
required dependencies?
Thanks,
Emile
3:02 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 11:35 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
Installing signond and libaccounts-glib-tools pulls in a mere 32
others, so that would seem to be the way to go. These two should
trigger the required dependencies?
I don't know whether that is enough for what Alberto had in mind.
Note that even if it does, you will end up with Google access tokens in
Ubuntu Online Accounts and a syncevolution-bundle which cannot use those
tokens because UOA support was not enabled when compiling it.
At this point the only solution for your needs (activesync + UOA) is to
compile from source.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
4:13 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 11:35 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> Installing signond and libaccounts-glib-tools pulls in a mere 32
> others, so that would seem to be the way to go. These two should
> trigger the required dependencies?
I don't know whether that is enough for what Alberto had in mind.
Note that even if it does, you will end up with Google access tokens in
Ubuntu Online Accounts and a syncevolution-bundle which cannot use those
tokens because UOA support was not enabled when compiling it.
At this point the only solution for your needs (activesync + UOA) is to
compile from source.
That'd mean I'd have to stop using the ppa-provided binaries. Is this
support likely to be compiled in in the foreseeable future? I'd prefer to
keep with the test program for SyncEvolution.
Regards,
Emile
4:27 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 13:13 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Patrick Ohly
<patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 11:35 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> Installing signond and libaccounts-glib-tools pulls in a
mere 32
> others, so that would seem to be the way to go. These two
should
> trigger the required dependencies?
I don't know whether that is enough for what Alberto had in
mind.
Note that even if it does, you will end up with Google access
tokens in
Ubuntu Online Accounts and a syncevolution-bundle which cannot
use those
tokens because UOA support was not enabled when compiling it.
At this point the only solution for your needs (activesync +
UOA) is to
compile from source.
That'd mean I'd have to stop using the ppa-provided binaries.
You mean the binaries from syncevolution.org? Those are not built using
Launchpad and do not target Ubuntu alone, so the term "ppa" is a bit
misleading.
Is this support likely to be compiled in in the foreseeable future?
I'd prefer to keep with the test program for SyncEvolution.
I think I can add it next week.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
4:21 p.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>wrote:
> That'd mean I'd have to stop using the ppa-provided
binaries.
You mean the binaries from syncevolution.org? Those are not built using
Launchpad and do not target Ubuntu alone, so the term "ppa" is a bit
misleading.
Ah yes, my mistake. I have "deb
http://downloads.syncevolution.org/aptunstable main" in my
sources.list -- I meant that.
> Is this support likely to be compiled in in the foreseeable
future?
> I'd prefer to keep with the test program for SyncEvolution.
I think I can add it next week.
Super. It will take me longer than that to figure out the gsso bits in any
case.
Thanks,
Emile
11:31 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 10:11 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Alberto Mardegan
> <alberto.mardegan(a)canonical.com> wrote:
>
>
> It's possible to inject an oauth token into UOA so that
> syncevolution
> will use it. However, I'm not sure of how many dependencies
> are required
> to have this working in Ubuntu Server. The packages you
> definitely need are:
> syncevolution-provider-uoa
> account-plugin-google
> account-plugin-tools
Does SyncEvolution use "Device" or "Installed Apps" OAuth2
authentication
for google? Because generating a device token is very easy. Even an
installed app shouldn't be hard (I think this script capture the bulk of
getting the token: https://gist.github.com/jotto/2932998), but whether that
works or not depends entirely on whether SyncEvolution uses GOA et al just
to get a token, or whether it uses GOA et all to handle much more of the
communication with Google. In the former case, I could just try to add a
shim that fakes getting the GOA token (or something to that effect).
Regards,
Emile
11:55 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 20:31 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Patrick Ohly
<patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 10:11 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Alberto Mardegan
> <alberto.mardegan(a)canonical.com> wrote:
>
>
> It's possible to inject an oauth token into UOA so
that
> syncevolution
> will use it. However, I'm not sure of how many
dependencies
> are required
> to have this working in Ubuntu Server. The packages
you
> definitely need are:
> syncevolution-provider-uoa
> account-plugin-google
> account-plugin-tools
Does SyncEvolution use "Device" or "Installed Apps" OAuth2
authentication for google?
This is left to GOA, UOA, and gSSO. I don't think SyncEvolution gets to
choose.
UOA and gSSO are a bit more flexible, though. Perhaps there is a way to
choose specific modes. I don't know.
With GOA, SyncEvolutions shares access that gets granted to GNOME. What
that is is hard-coded in GOA.
Because generating a device token is very easy. Even an installed
app
shouldn't be hard (I think this script capture the bulk of getting the
token: https://gist.github.com/jotto/2932998), but whether that works
or not depends entirely on whether SyncEvolution uses GOA et al just
to get a token, or whether it uses GOA et all to handle much more of
the communication with Google. In the former case, I could just try to
add a shim that fakes getting the GOA token (or something to that
effect).
SyncEvolution needs the OAuth2 bearer string as returned by GOA in the
org.gnome.OnlineAccounts.OAuth2Based GetAccessToken method.
Have a look at src/backends/goa/goa.cpp. It doesn't do much, just wrap
GOA D-Bus API in the SyncEvolution AuthProvider API. Note that this API
already passes in both the configured username *and* password. It would
be possible to write a new auth provider which expects username/password
to be in the SyncEvolution config and then turns that into an access
token.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
4:57 p.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 13:13 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Patrick Ohly
> <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 11:35 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> That'd mean I'd have to stop using the ppa-provided binaries.
You mean the binaries from syncevolution.org? Those are not built using
Launchpad and do not target Ubuntu alone, so the term "ppa" is a bit
misleading.
> Is this support likely to be compiled in in the foreseeable future?
> I'd prefer to keep with the test program for SyncEvolution.
I think I can add it next week.
Would it be problematic to enable the xmlrpc backend also?
Regards,
Emile
7:05 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 01:57 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Patrick Ohly
<patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>
wrote:
[UOA support]
> Is this support likely to be compiled in in the
foreseeable
future?
> I'd prefer to keep with the test program for SyncEvolution.
I think I can add it next week.
Sorry, the Google CardDAV interoperability kept me and the nightly build
machine busy.
I enabled provideruoa.so compilation on Ubuntu Saucy and will include it
in the next SyncEvolution 1.4.99.2. I hesitate to say next week again,
but that actually is the goal.
Would it be problematic to enable the xmlrpc backend also?
I checked, enabling that would indeed be problematic. The backend
depends on the C++ version of xmlrpc, which changed the ABI between
Ubuntu Saucy and Trusty. If I compiled on Saucy (which is fairly easy to
do because I have the distro already set up for compiling some part of
the binary release), then the backend won't work on Trusty.
I'd prefer to not spend more effort on offering a binary which only one
user asked for at the moment.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
7:16 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] SyncEvolution + UOA + Ubuntu 14.4 (Trusty) (was: Re: Gnome Online Accounts)
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>wrote:
On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 01:57 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com>
> wrote:
[UOA support]
> > Is this support likely to be compiled in in the foreseeable
> future?
> > I'd prefer to keep with the test program for SyncEvolution.
>
>
> I think I can add it next week.
Sorry, the Google CardDAV interoperability kept me and the nightly build
machine busy.
No problem.
I enabled provideruoa.so compilation on Ubuntu Saucy and will include
it
in the next SyncEvolution 1.4.99.2. I hesitate to say next week again,
but that actually is the goal.
Also not a problem.
> Would it be problematic to enable the xmlrpc backend also?
I checked, enabling that would indeed be problematic. The backend
depends on the C++ version of xmlrpc, which changed the ABI between
Ubuntu Saucy and Trusty. If I compiled on Saucy (which is fairly easy to
do because I have the distro already set up for compiling some part of
the binary release), then the backend won't work on Trusty.
I'd prefer to not spend more effort on offering a binary which only one
user asked for at the moment.
And no objections to that at all. I'll see what I can put together, knowing
that these can be compiled and loaded separately. In the end, I want a
scriptable backend, I just figured that if xmlrpc was already there, an
xmlrpc proxy would be easier to create than a new SyncEvolution backend.
Thanks,
Emile
2960
days inactive
2989
days old
syncevolution@synevolution.org
16 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Alberto Mardegan -
Emiliano Heyns -
Patrick Ohly