GNU bug report logs - #27943
tar complains about too-long names (guix release)

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>

Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2017 07:23:01 UTC

Severity: important

Tags: fixed

Done: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 27943 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#27943: tar complains about too-long names (guix release)
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 18:12:20 -0500
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 02:55:52PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > I thought about it, but since it’s an unsual case, what about adding a
> > special property to packages instead?  You’d write:
> > 
> >   (package
> >     ;; …
> >     (properties '((fixed-vulnerabilities "CVE-123-4567" "CVE-123-4568"))))
> > 
> > ‘guix lint’ would honor this property, and that would address both cases
> > like this and situations where a CVE is known to no longer apply, as is
> > the case with unversioned CVEs¹.
> > 
> > Thoughts?

I'd rather the property's name more clearly reflect that it doesn't
actually fix the vulnerability, but just prevents the linter from
complaining about it.

Someone who sees this property used in a package could reasonably assume
that it's required to list all fixed CVEs in a 'fixed-vulnerabilities'
list, and that it is the "single source of truth" for which bugs apply
to a package. But, it would not actually have anything to do with that,
just being a way to silence the linter.

However, I can't think of a good idea for another name...

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:49:01PM +0200, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> I like that idea. It also allows us to mitigate a CVE without needing to
> specifically add a patch. I've attached my first attempt at implementing
> it.

I think of `guix lint -c cve` as one of many tools for discovering
important problems in our packages, but I don't think that we must
absolutely silence the linter. It's always going to be imprecise, with
both false negative and positive results.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

This bug report was last modified 7 years and 137 days ago.

Previous Next


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