From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 bugfixes for 3.2-rc5 Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:08:46 -0500 Message-ID: <20111215190846.GA2709@thunk.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:35635 "EHLO test.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759360Ab1LOTIt (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:08:49 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 06:50:07PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > > There is a signed tag tytso-for-linus-20111214 covering these patches, > > which fix a potential hang, crash (on big endian), and data corruption > > bugs which show up when using fsx and/or Hugh's kernel compile/mm > > torture test. > > Ok, since I build my own git versions, I have one that can pull signed > tags and automatically verifies them and saves the signed tag > information as part of the commit object. Cool! Does it save enough that GPG signature information can be verified later? I'm a little fuzzy on what is covered by the signature which gets verified when you run the command "git verify-tag tytso-for-linus-20111214". Better yet, does the new version of git have a command that will automatically verify the digital signature found in a merge commit? And this isn't in 1.7.8 yet, right? I'd have to build version of git based on the next branch to play with this new signatury goodness? - Ted