Actually this has been fixed upstream since 2.6.36-rc3.
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => Fix Released
** Changed in: linux
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
http
set to Triaged as there is no assigned resource.
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/623087
Title:
ecryptfs file permis
** Tags added: kernel-key
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/623087
Title:
ecryptfs file permissions broken with kernel 2.6.36-rc2
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.c
Patch
(http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=93c3fe40c279f002906ad14584c30671097d4394)
released in 2.6.36-rc3
(http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/testing/ChangeLog-2.6.36-rc3).
** Changed in: ecryptfs
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
On Wed Aug 25, 2010 at 09:07:16AM -, Kalle Valo
wrote:
> Rocko writes:
>
> After fsck and booting to an older kernel I saw some of the directories
> twice in my home directory, for example Documents and Downloads. I
> assume gnome created a new set of directories because it wasn't able to
>
I've pushed a fix into the ecryptfs next branch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/ecryptfs/ecryptfs-2.6.git;a=commit;h=b4ef26e06ce0c4877bd5a736b0dfb318a4fb9002
** Changed in: ecryptfs
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Tyler Hicks (ty
Rocko writes:
> But could this commit have resulted in the data loss that Kalle Valo
> reported? It seems to be just related to the file
> name/permissions/ownerships/size information and it made writing to (and
> reading of) files with encrypted filenames impossible.
Difficult to be sure. But a
Thanks for the info. I manually changed those two calls to
ecryptfs_lookup_one_lower in inode.c back to lookup_one_len and it fixed
the problem. Don't you just love patches that are released for bugs that
don't exist any more just in case the patch might be useful sometime in
the future? :)
But co
** Also affects: ecryptfs
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: ecryptfs
Importance: Undecided => Critical
** Changed in: ecryptfs
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: ecryptfs
Assignee: (unassigned) => Tyler Hicks (tyhicks)
--
ecryptfs file permissions
On Tue Aug 24, 2010 at 03:51:04PM -, Jeremy Foshee
<623...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> Sorry for all the changes Tyler. I changed it to linux intending for it
> to be under the Ubuntu Distro, ...
No problem, but I don't know if Ubuntu needs to track this one. It is a
regression that is only
Sorry for all the changes Tyler. I changed it to linux intending for it
to be under the Ubuntu Distro, but I did it incorrectly. I've fixed
that, but as a result it took more steps than I'd planned.
~JFo
** Project changed: ecryptfs => linux
** Also affects: linux (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecid
11 matches
Mail list logo
