Comment 3 for bug 690549

It's been soo long I honestly don't feel like messing with it. Thanks
anyway.

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Michael Terry
<email address hidden>wrote:

> How easy is it for you to try a branch of duplicity? I've linked this
> bug to lp:~mterry/duplicity/tarfile which uses a more up-to-date
> tarfile.py that seems to support negative uid/gid numbers.
>
> ** Branch linked: lp:~mterry/duplicity/tarfile
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug
> report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/690549
>
> Title:
> uid and guid setting adversely affects integrity
>
> Status in Duplicity - Bandwidth Efficient Encrypted Backup:
> New
> Status in “duplicity” package in Ubuntu:
> New
>
> Bug description:
> Binary package hint: duplicity
>
> Ubuntu 10.10 Server
> Duplicity 0.6.11(compiled, not apt-get)
>
> I have an Ubuntu machine importing nfs shares from my various systems,
> including those exported from Windows machines (via Cygwin). I backup
> all my computers from this system; it makes maintenance easy, and
> duplicity is a fantastic solution. Unfortunately there is a segment
> of code which modifies the uid and gid (in tarfile.py::getheader) for
> any file whose id's are larger than 2097151 (2^21 -1), and for my
> Windows 7 systems, the Administrators group possesses a gid of -1,
> which is interpreted as (4^32 -1). The section of code changes these
> id's to 60001. This will be a problem during disaster recovery.
>
> I attached a patch that solves the problem by extending the gid and
> uid fieldsize.
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/duplicity/+bug/690549/+subscriptions
>