similar to: [PATCH] builder: when not checking sigs, ignore --fingerprint args (RHBZ#1193237)

Add an architecture field for all the entries in each index, so we know which architecture they are (not used right now, but will be in the future). The problematic part here is properly marking with the correct architecture: since we only know the current index on libguestfs.org contains x86_64/amd64 images, entries coming from it are marked that way; images in all the other indexes

Hi, attached there is a serie of patches that completes the work on making virt-builder use .conf files, shipped in XDG directories, to configure all the available sources of indexes used. This also removes the hardcoded default location, replaced now with a configuration file (which may be not used at all). Thanks, Pino Toscano (8): builder: allow "no key" as key in Sigchecker

This series adds new APIs to support btrfstune. Chen Hanxiao (2): New API: btrfs-image New API: btrfs_image_restore daemon/btrfs.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ generator/actions.ml | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- 3 files changed, 133 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.1.0

Signed-off-by: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao@cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/btrfs.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ generator/actions.ml | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- 3 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/daemon/btrfs.c b/daemon/btrfs.c index be648bc..e036880 100644 --- a/daemon/btrfs.c +++ b/daemon/btrfs.c @@ -2054,3 +2054,41

Signed-off-by: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao@cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/btrfs.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ generator/actions.ml | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- 3 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/daemon/btrfs.c b/daemon/btrfs.c index d4b3207..be648bc 100644 --- a/daemon/btrfs.c +++ b/daemon/btrfs.c @@

Signed-off-by: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao@cn.fujitsu.com> --- v3: remove optional paramter numthreads(-t) v2: add optargs_bitmask check daemon/btrfs.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ generator/actions.ml | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- 3 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/daemon/btrfs.c b/daemon/btrfs.c index

Signed-off-by: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao@cn.fujitsu.com> --- v2: add optargs_bitmask check daemon/btrfs.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ generator/actions.ml | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ src/MAX_PROC_NR | 2 +- 3 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/daemon/btrfs.c b/daemon/btrfs.c index d4b3207..340b548 100644 ---

--- "David W. Tamkin" <dattier@panix.com> wrote: > Our Leader asked, > > | In any case, if you run flac -t and it passes, the only extra > | information you get from comparing the MD5 sum to the text > | file is to know if the original seeder put the right text file > | together with the right FLAC file. But if you don't need the > | contents of the text

Hello! I noticed the ssh client now allows you to paste a fingerprint at the host key verification question which I thought was pretty cool and a welcome feature. When testing it out I discovered it did not care about the case of the entered hash, and looking at sshconnect.c I see strcasecmp() is used which explains why. I'm just curious if this was a deliberate decision or if it would make

From: Christian Hesse <mail at eworm.de> Signed-off-by: Christian Hesse <mail at eworm.de> --- ssh_config.5 | 8 ++++++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/ssh_config.5 b/ssh_config.5 index 5b0975f..28f7714 100644 --- a/ssh_config.5 +++ b/ssh_config.5 @@ -649,9 +649,13 @@ The default is .It Cm FingerprintHash Specifies the hash algorithm used when

Hi, Does anyone know what algorithm the commercial ssh-2.3.0 uses to display the key fingerprints ? On the manual it says the algorithm is 'bubble babble' but I didn't find out how to actually create this bubble string (I guess I could find out from the sources). I think that it would be a nice option if OpenSSH could print out the host keys fingerprint in same format as the

Hi, I am trying to see if I can use R to perform more rigorous regression analysis. I wonder if the fingerprint package is able to handle pipeline pilot fingerprints (ECFC6 etc) now. Thank you, Eric [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hello, I try to find a way to handle SSH connections differently depending if it comes from a 'trusted" computer or from an unknown computer (for instance giving access to a shell versus allowing only scp/sftp in a chrooted environment). Using the IP address is not a solution since a trusted computer can be a laptop that is connected somewhere on Internet. One solution could be to use

You really don't need openssl for that. And the fingerprints are simple. Here is a python script that do the same as ssh-keygen -fl /path/to/key : #!/usr/bin/env python3 import binascii import hashlib import sys if __name__ == "__main__": key = binascii.a2b_base64(sys.argv[1]) if sys.argv[2] == "md5": m = hashlib.new("md5")

Please find attached file "configure.ac+dns.patch". This patch allow to compile current (30 Jun 2003) with options --with-dns on my platform. Output from "ssh -v -o VerifyHostKeyDNS=yes ..." follow: ... debug1: found 1 fingerprints in DNS debug1: matching host key fingerprint found in DNS ... -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text

Harry, > so i was wondering what advantages it could give me to make a ffp > file, because there is already a internally stored md5 checksum on the > decoded audio data inside the flac file? Testing the .flac file against its internally stored fingerprint lets you know that you have a properly encoded .flac file of *something*. If you also certify that internally stored fingerprint

I've just written this patch, it's undergone minimal testing and "works for me" and I'm after feedback as to acceptability of approach, anything I should be doing differently for the feature to be acceptable upstream and what I should be doing about automated testing. Use-case: you have the host's SSH fingerprints via an out-of-band mechanism which you trust and want to

--- "Paino, Christopher L YN1(AW) (CPF N0084)" <PainoCL@cpf.navy.mil> wrote: > If I am understanding FLAC correctly, the internal MD5 sum is (or can > be > )different than the fingerprint file sum. Yes. > The internal sum can be > different > depending on which compression settings are used, while the audio > remains > unchanged. It's the other way

Our Leader asked, | In any case, if you run flac -t and it passes, the only extra | information you get from comparing the MD5 sum to the text | file is to know if the original seeder put the right text file | together with the right FLAC file. But if you don't need the | contents of the text file to know if the file was d/l'ed OK, | why do you need the text file at all? [Anywhere in

2007/10/15, David W. Tamkin <dattier@panix.com>: > > Harry, > > > so i was wondering what advantages it could give me to make a ffp > > file, because there is already a internally stored md5 checksum on the > > decoded audio data inside the flac file? > > Testing the .flac file against its internally stored fingerprint lets > you know that you have a