Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 174139
Faulty magic database entry triggers erroneously
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:17 EST
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows; U; AIIEEEE!; Win98; Windows 98; en-US; Gecko masquerading as IE; should it matter?; rv:1.8b) Gecko/20050217
Description of problem:
There is a faulty entry in /usr/share/file/magic in "cracklib" section which triggers on just about every binary file.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
Actual Results: Basenames: (1628767744 words)
Expected Results: Basenames: data
The expected result wont happen until the other bug (#174137) is fixed.
But the test file is not a cracklib password index!
And lots of other binary files produce the same result.
It is caused be a simple bug in new cracklib entry in magic file.
See patch for a fix.
Created attachment 121470 [details]
Patch to fix fault in magic file
patch -p0 <magic.patch
From User-Agent: XML-RPC
file-4.16-fc4.1 has been pushed for FC4, which should resolve this issue. If these problems are still present in this version, then please make note of it in this bug report.
(In reply to comment #2)
> From User-Agent: XML-RPC
> file-4.16-fc4.1 has been pushed for FC4, which should resolve this issue. If
these problems are still present in this version, then please make note of it in
this bug report.
No, the issue is not resolved!
Why do you close bugs when you haven't even tested them?
I have gone to the trouble of even supplying a patch to fix the problem, yet you
ignore the patch, close the bug, don't even test it ... what exactly are you
trying to achieve?
Slow down please, here's my output
root@gigolo ~# rpm -q file
root@gigolo ~# file /var/lib/rpm/Basenames
/var/lib/rpm/Basenames: Berkeley DB (Hash, version 8, native byte-order)
Do you consider it wrong? I don't.
> Do you consider it wrong? I don't.
Please see my comments for bug #174137 (they are both the result of the same error).
And to answer your question truthfully, yes, it is wrong. And, yes, I know that
you don't consider it to be.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 174137 ***