linux-kernel - Re: [git patches] libata updates, GPG signed (but see admin notes)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CA+55aFzstE-+NzfSAWMEokB7-rYsZOcZe9Ez-LxPNOKnciJ3UQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 2 Nov 2011 19:19:34 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Shawn Pearce <spearce@...arce.org>
Cc:	Junio C Hamano <gitster@...ox.com>, git@...r.kernel.org,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git patches] libata updates, GPG signed (but see admin notes)

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>   [torvalds@i5 linux]$ git fetch git://github.com/rustyrussell/linux.git  refs/tags/rusty@...tcorp.com.au-v3.1-8068-g5087a50

So this trivial patch removes one line of code, and makes this actually work.

However, it also makes us fail many tests that *test* that we peeled
what we fetched. However, I think the tests are wrong.

If the tag doesn't resolve into a commit, we happily output the SHA1
of the tag itself - and we say that it shouldn't be merged.

And it the tag *does* resolve into a commit, why would we output the
SHA1 of the commit? The tag should be peeled properly later when it
gets used, so peeling it here seems to be just a misfeature that makes
signed tags not work well.

So I suspect we should just apply this patch, but I didn't check
exacty what the failed tests are - except for the first one, that just
compares against a canned response (and the canned response should
just be changed). Maybe there was some reason for the peeling,
although I suspect it was just a fairly mindless case of "make it a
commit, because the merge needs the commit" - never mind that the
merge would peel it anyway.

                           Linus

View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (550 bytes)