Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: What Thomas was trying to do is to get a cheap, fast random number generator. Shred seems to have such. You're better off with /dev/urandom, it's much easier to understand what it's trying to do, vs the rather baroque logic in

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue 13 Feb 2024 at 11:21:08 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 09:35:11AM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > On Tue 13 Feb 2024 at 07:15:48 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:01:47PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > > > … but not much. For me,

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 01:03:44PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > On 2/13/24 09:40, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: > > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > > Shred will determine the size of the file, then write data to the > > > file, rewind, write data again, etc. On a traditional hard drive, >

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 16:00, David Christensen wrote: On 2/13/24 11:31, gene heskett wrote: Next experiment is a pair of 4T Silicon Power SSD's When they & the startech usb3 adapters arrive.  I'll get that NAS built for amanda yet. 2.5" SATA SSD's and SATA to USB adapter cables for $187.97 + $10.99 =

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 09:40, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: Greg Wooledge wrote: Shred will determine the size of the file, then write data to the file, rewind, write data again, etc. On a traditional hard drive, that will overwrite the original private information. On modern devices, it may not.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 11:31, gene heskett wrote: Next experiment is a pair of 4T Silicon Power SSD's When they & the startech usb3 adapters arrive.  I'll get that NAS built for amanda yet. 2.5" SATA SSD's and SATA to USB adapter cables for $187.97 + $10.99 = $198.96 each set?

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 14:44, Thomas Schmitt wrote: Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: Next experiment is a pair of 4T Silicon Power SSD's When f3 has (hopefully) given its OK, the topic of a full write-and-read test will come up again. I'm looking forward to all the spin-off topics. I'll have to admit it has

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: > Next experiment is a pair of 4T Silicon Power SSD's When f3 has (hopefully) given its OK, the topic of a full write-and-read test will come up again. I'm looking forward to all the spin-off topics. Have a nice day :) Thomas

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, Greg Wooledge wrote: > Heh. Don't forget your own attempts to use a shredder as a PRNG stream. My original idea was to watch a minimal shred run by teeing its work into a checksummer. But then topic drift came in. So we got a farm show of random generators and a discussion about what

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 12:56, Thomas Schmitt wrote: Hi, Greg Wooledge wrote: Let me write out the example again, but with the bug fixed, and then explain what each line does, [... lecture about advanced shell programming ...] And this all because Gene Heskett was adventurous enough to buy a cheap fake

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 06:54:58PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > Let me write out the example again, but with the bug fixed, and then > > explain what each line does, [... lecture about advanced shell > > programming ...] > > And this all because Gene Heskett was

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, Greg Wooledge wrote: > Let me write out the example again, but with the bug fixed, and then > explain what each line does, [... lecture about advanced shell > programming ...] And this all because Gene Heskett was adventurous enough to buy a cheap fake USB disk. :)) Have a nice day :)

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Greg Wooledge wrote: > Shred will determine the size of the file, then write data to the > file, rewind, write data again, etc. On a traditional hard drive, > that will overwrite the original private information. On modern > devices, it may not. Thanks for the excellent explanation :) One

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 09:35:11AM -0600, David Wright wrote: > On Tue 13 Feb 2024 at 07:15:48 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:01:47PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > > … but not much. For me, "standard output" is /dev/fd/1, yet it seems > > > unlikely that anyone is

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue 13 Feb 2024 at 07:15:48 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:01:47PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > … but not much. For me, "standard output" is /dev/fd/1, yet it seems > > unlikely that anyone is going to use >&1 in the manner of the example. > > Standard output

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, "info shred" says: > > > i=$(mktemp) > > > exec 3<>"$i" > > > rm -- "$i" > > > echo "Hello, world" >&3 > > > shred - >&3 > > > exec 3>- Greg Wooledge wrote: > In fact, that last line is > written incorrectly. It should say "exec 3>&-" and what that does >

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 07:36:14AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 07:15:48AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > This is an obvious bug in the info page. I wonder how many years > > this has gone unnoticed. > > I've filed Bug#1063837 for it.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 07:15:48AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > This is an obvious bug in the info page. I wonder how many years > this has gone unnoticed. I've filed Bug#1063837 for it.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:01:47PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > … but not much. For me, "standard output" is /dev/fd/1, yet it seems > unlikely that anyone is going to use >&1 in the manner of the example. Standard output means "whatever file descriptor 1 points to". That could be a file, a

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 10:07:45PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_is_a_file > > But, there is more than one kind of file. > > "All files are equal. > But some files are more equal than others." > > (George Orwell in his dystopic novel "Server

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun 11 Feb 2024 at 09:16:00 (-0600), David Wright wrote: > On Sun 11 Feb 2024 at 09:54:24 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:45:21PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > Still there's the discrepancy between doc and behaviour. > > > > There isn't. The documentation

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 12/02/2024 05:41, David Christensen wrote: Apparently, shred(1) has both an info(1) page (?) and a man(1) page. The obvious solution is to write one document that is complete and correct, and use it everywhere -- e.g. DRY. https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Man-Pages.html 6.9

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_is_a_file > But, there is more than one kind of file. "All files are equal. But some files are more equal than others." (George Orwell in his dystopic novel "Server Farm".) Have a nice day :) Thomas

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/12/24 08:50, Curt wrote: On 2024-02-11, wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: [...] If FILE is -, shred standard output. =20 In every sentence, the word FILE appears. There's nothing in there which says "you can operate on a non-file".

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 04:50:50PM -, Curt wrote: > On 2024-02-11, wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >>If FILE is -, shred standard output. > >>=20 > >> In every sentence, the word FILE appears. There's nothing in

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2024-02-11, wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > [...] > >>If FILE is -, shred standard output. >>=20 >> In every sentence, the word FILE appears. There's nothing in there >> which says "you can operate on a non-file". > > Point taken, yes.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/11/24 06:54, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:45:21PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: [...] What Thomas was trying to do is to get a cheap,

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun 11 Feb 2024 at 09:54:24 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:45:21PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > >

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > Still there's the discrepancy between doc and behaviour. Depends at which documentation you look. Obviously stemming from https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=155175#36 i read in

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: [...] >If FILE is -, shred standard output. > > In every sentence, the word FILE appears. There's nothing in there > which says "you can operate on a non-file". Point taken, yes. Cheers -- t signature.asc Description:

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:45:21PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > [...] > > > > What Thomas was trying to do is to get a cheap, fast random number > > >

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: [...] > > What Thomas was trying to do is to get a cheap, fast random number > > generator. Shred seems to have such. > > Well... I certainly wouldn't call it a

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 07:10:54PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > > > 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ > > > $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c > > > shred: -:

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

David Christensen wrote: > On 2/10/24 16:10, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > >> 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ > >> $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c > >> shred: -: invalid file type > >> 0 > >> > >> > >> It looks like a shred(1) needs

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 07:10:54PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > > 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ > > $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c > > shred: -: invalid file type > > 0 > > > > > > It looks like a shred(1) needs a bug report.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/10/24 16:10, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c shred: -: invalid file type 0 It looks like a shred(1) needs a bug report. I'm confused what you expected this command to

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ > $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c > shred: -: invalid file type > 0 > > > It looks like a shred(1) needs a bug report. I'm confused what you expected this command to do. You wanted to "destroy"

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/10/24 04:40, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 11:38:21AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: [...] But shred(1) on Debian 11 refuses on "-" contrary to its documentation: shred: -: invalid file type A non-existing file path causes "No such file or directory". Hmm. This looks

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 01:40:35PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 11:38:21AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > > [...] > > > But shred(1) on Debian 11 refuses on "-" contrary to its documentation: > > shred: -: invalid file type > > A non-existing file path causes "No

shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 11:38:21AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: [...] > But shred(1) on Debian 11 refuses on "-" contrary to its documentation: > shred: -: invalid file type > A non-existing file path causes "No such file or directory". Hmm. This looks like a genuine bug: the man page