emacs-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[debbugs-tracker] bug#13588: closed (Pax hangs in case big UID)


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: [debbugs-tracker] bug#13588: closed (Pax hangs in case big UID)
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:21:03 +0000

Your message dated Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:20:04 +0200
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#13588: Pax hangs in case big UID
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #13588,
regarding Pax hangs in case big UID
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
13588: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13588
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Pax hangs in case big UID Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 14:31:11 +0100 User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2
Dear folks,

I am trying to solve problem in case that user is created with big UID
and during configuration pax hangs and need user interaction.

Last list are:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-automake/2011-11/msg00014.html
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=843376

Below patch to my previous correction
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2013-01/msg00079.html

It checks also command id whether it exists.
If id does not exists on (not Linux system) then we do not care about that.

Patch is bellow and against upstream:

diff --git a/m4/tar.m4 b/m4/tar.m4
index ec8c83e..fc03e8e 100644
--- a/m4/tar.m4
+++ b/m4/tar.m4
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([_AM_PROG_TAR],
 [# Always define AMTAR for backward compatibility.  Yes, it's still used
 # in the wild :-(  We should find a proper way to deprecate it ...
 AC_SUBST([AMTAR], ['$${TAR-tar}'])
+AC_SUBST([AM_BIG_ID], [2097152])
 m4_if([$1], [v7],
[am__tar='$${TAR-tar} chof - "$$tardir"' am__untar='$${TAR-tar} xf -'],
      [m4_case([$1], [ustar],, [pax],,
@@ -33,6 +34,7 @@ _am_tools='gnutar m4_if([$1], [ustar], [plaintar]) pax cpio none'
 _am_tools=${am_cv_prog_tar_$1-$_am_tools}
 # Do not fold the above two line into one, because Tru64 sh and
 # Solaris sh will not grok spaces in the rhs of '-'.
+ac_returnCode=0
 for _am_tool in $_am_tools
 do
   case $_am_tool in
@@ -79,13 +81,42 @@ do
   mkdir conftest.dir
   echo GrepMe > conftest.dir/file
   AM_RUN_LOG([tardir=conftest.dir && eval $am__tar_ >conftest.tar])
+  ac_return=$?
   rm -rf conftest.dir
+  if test $ac_return -ne 0; then
+      if test "$_am_tool" = "pax"; then
+            ac_returnCode=$ac_return
+            echo "pax return value is: $ac_returnCode"
+            break;
+    fi
+    if test "$_am_tool" = "gnutar"; then
+            ac_returnCode=$ac_return
+            echo "gnutar return value is: $ac_returnCode"
+            break;
+    fi
+  fi
   if test -s conftest.tar; then
     AM_RUN_LOG([$am__untar <conftest.tar])
     grep GrepMe conftest.dir/file >/dev/null 2>&1 && break
   fi
 done
 rm -rf conftest.dir
+if test $ac_returnCode -ne 0; then
+  # Do not want to print user_id on screen
+  AC_CHECK_PROG([ID_TEST], id , [yes], [no])
+  if test x"$ID_TEST" = x"yes"; then
+    user_id=`id -u`
+    if test $? -eq 0; then
+        #Test if $user_id is greater then 2^21
+ #if yes then failed. This is valid only for pax and gnutar utilities
+        if test $user_id -gt $AM_BIG_ID ; then
+          AC_MSG_ERROR([The uid may be too big ...],[2])
+        fi
+    else
+ AC_MSG_WARN([id -u command was not found and check to id is suppressed])
+    fi
+  fi
+fi

 AC_CACHE_VAL([am_cv_prog_tar_$1], [am_cv_prog_tar_$1=$_am_tool])
 AC_MSG_RESULT([$am_cv_prog_tar_$1])])


Please check and incorporate them if you agree.

--
S pozdravem / Best regards

Petr Hracek

--
S pozdravem / Best regards

Petr Hracek

Red Hat Czech s.r.o.
BaseOS Core Services Brno

Email: address@hidden
Web: www.cz.redhat.com




--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#13588: Pax hangs in case big UID Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:20:04 +0200
On 04/29/2013 12:18 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 04/29/2013 08:11 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>> I have re-introduced the line removed by mistake.
>>
>> It seems to be completely OK now,
>>
> Thanks, I will push shortly then, barring further objections.
> 
>> thanks a LOT for your patience.
>>
> I think you and the other reviewers should be thanked for
> *your* patience here ;-)
> 
>> I don't see any problems and also all test passes for me.
>>
>> Have a nice day,
>> Pavel
>>
> 
> Regards,
>   Stefano
>
Patch merged, at last!  I'm finally closing this bug report.

Thanks to all the involved people for their help and patience,
  Stefano


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]