GNU bug report logs - #24406
rm command: different behaviors seen with indirect blocks of a file

Previous Next

Package: coreutils;

Reported by: "Kothagere Siddalinga, Mahesh" <mxk145330 <at> utdallas.edu>

Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 17:59:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 24406 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 24406 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox

Report forwarded to bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org:
bug#24406; Package coreutils. (Sat, 10 Sep 2016 17:59:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent to "Kothagere Siddalinga, Mahesh" <mxk145330 <at> utdallas.edu>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org. (Sat, 10 Sep 2016 17:59:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Kothagere Siddalinga, Mahesh" <mxk145330 <at> utdallas.edu>
To: "bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org" <bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org>
Subject: rm command: different behaviors seen with indirect blocks of a file
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 16:51:49 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi,

I am Mahesh, part of the team that is working on a tool to undelete the files on ext3 file system.
One of the ideas on which the tool is based is “the rm command marks the inode free but does not zero out the data blocks and the indirect blocks”
While this is validated to be true on my version of Linux, Ubuntu 16.04, some of my friends using fedora found out that the indirect blocks at the 13th pointer of the inode is indeed being zeroed.

This difference of behavior is seemingly mysterious to me. Request you to point me in the direction as to why only some distributions of Linux seems to zero out the indirect block pointers associated with the files.

Thanks,
Mahesh.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]
Reply sent to Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>:
You have taken responsibility. (Sat, 10 Sep 2016 19:09:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
Notification sent to "Kothagere Siddalinga, Mahesh" <mxk145330 <at> utdallas.edu>:
bug acknowledged by developer. (Sat, 10 Sep 2016 19:09:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #10 received at 24406-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: "Kothagere Siddalinga, Mahesh" <mxk145330 <at> utdallas.edu>,
 24406-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24406: rm command: different behaviors seen with indirect
 blocks of a file
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 12:07:59 -0700

Kothagere Siddalinga, Mahesh wrote:
> Request you to point me in the direction as to why only some distributions of Linux seems to zero out the indirect block pointers associated with the files.

I'm afraid that bug-coreutils is not a good mailing list to query about this. 
You might doing your homework by reading the relevant file systems' source code.
bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Sun, 09 Oct 2016 11:24:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 8 years and 259 days ago.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.