Bug#1059400: kubetail: Broken on Debian Bookworm ("syntax error near unexpected token") due to Bash 5.2 incompatibility

Package: kubetail Version: 1.6.5-2 Severity: important Tags: upstream Dear Maintainer, Unfortunately, attempting to use kubetail fails on Debian Bookworm. In particular, any trivial use reports a "syntax error", as follows: ``` $ kubetail nginx Will tail 2 logs...

Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] x86: retbleed=stuff fixes

Thanks, I've been testing those patches on my real system (i5-7200U) for the last day with no problems so far, waking from s2ram works as well. I can also no longer see those `sarq $5, %gs:0x1337` with %gs=0 on QEMU. Regards, - Joan

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/6] x86: Fix suspend vs retbleed=stuff

Hi Peter, I tried your patches on both QEMU and my two (real) computers where s2ram with `retbleed=stuff` was failing and they wake up fine now. However, I think some minor reviews are needed: (1) I got a build error due to a symbol conflict between the `restore_registers` in

Re: [PATCH] Add missing bound checks for software 842 decompressor

On 19.08.20 22:19, Kees Cook wrote: On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 02:33:41AM +0200, Joan Bruguera wrote: Any feedback? Hi! I just happened to see this email. I think this should likely be directed to the crypto (which also handled compress/decompress APIs) list and the original author

Re: [PATCH] Add missing bound checks for software 842 decompressor

Any feedback? - Joan On 05.06.20 17:44, Joan Bruguera wrote: The software 842 decompressor receives, through the initial value of the 'olen' parameter, the capacity of the buffer pointed to by 'out'. If this capacity is insufficient to decode the compressed bitstream, -ENOSPC should

[PATCH] Add missing bound checks for software 842 decompressor

("Short data test", 12, 8); return -ECANCELED; // Do not leave this test module hanging around } void cleanup_module(void) { } MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: 842"); Signed-off-by: Joan Bruguera --- lib/842/842_decompress.c | 6 ++ 1 file c

Re: Obscure issue with process substitution since bash-5.0.016 upgrade

Thanks for your attention and the provided reduced patch. I can confirm that, applied over bash-5.0.16, this solves my issue, both on the test case as well as the bigger application from which it was extracted. Regards, - Joan Bruguera On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 23:20, Chet Ramey wrote: > >

Re: Obscure issue with process substitution since bash-5.0.016 upgrade

. Therefore, ignore my previous email and consider this solved. Regards, - Joan Bruguera On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 04:15, Joan Bruguera Micó wrote: > I'm having a problem with a script that used to work, which I reduced > to the following test case: > > #!/bin/bash > >

Obscure issue with process substitution since bash-5.0.016 upgrade

een 5.0.015-5.0.016, and no fix is yet available to test. Thanks for your help, - Joan Bruguera PS: This is the first time I post to the mailing list, so preemptive apologies for any mistake I could have made.