Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 9 August 2018 at 18:15, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On 9 August 2018 at 17:28, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Michael Büsch <m@xxxxxxx> writes: >>>> >>>>> strncpy might not NUL-terminate the string, if the name equals the buffer size. >>>>> Use strlcpy instead. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <m@xxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> >>>> This is weird, with all the patches you submitted last week I get this >>>> if I download the patch from patchwork: >>>> >>>> $ git am -s 1.mbox >>>> Patch is empty. Was it split wrong? >>>> >>>> But if I download the patch directly from my IMAP folder I have no >>>> problems: >>>> >>>> $ git am -s 1.mbox >>>> Applying: b43/leds: Ensure NUL-termination of LED name string >>>> >>>> This happens even without my custom patchwork script so this has >>>> something to do with the patchwork server, but it's not obvious to me >>>> what triggers it. IIRC I have not seen anything like this before. It >>>> seems that you didn't use git-send-email, I strongly suggest to use that >>>> just to avoid problems like this. >>> >>> Looks like patchwork mishandles the pgp signature, the patchwork mbox has >>> >>>> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; >>>> boundary="Sig_/EN90ciRq4eWXDUcnZABQ0Ak"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" >>> >>> as the only content-type (and the boundary is nowhere to be found), >>> while the one in my inbox has >>> >>>> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; >>>> boundary="Sig_/EN90ciRq4eWXDUcnZABQ0Ak"; >>>> protocol="application/pgp-signature" >>>> >>>> --Sig_/EN90ciRq4eWXDUcnZABQ0Ak >>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>> >>> When I remove the Content-Type: line(s) from the mbox from patchwork, >>> git recognises it again as a patch. I guess git am ignores everything >>> until the boundary, which got dropped by patchwork, so it never finds >>> the actual patch. >> >> Awesome, thanks for debugging this! It would be great if someone could >> report this to the patchwork maintainers, I don't have the time right >> now. > > Silly question, but who *are* the maintainers? I just spend several > minutes on https://patchwork.kernel.org/ and google, and failed to > find any contact information. Not a silly question at all. I'm not sure what's the preferred way to report bugs but at least I found this: http://jk.ozlabs.org/projects/patchwork/ I guess they use the github tracker: https://github.com/getpatchwork/patchwork/issues/ -- Kalle Valo
