Comment 24 for bug 483928
Revision history for this message
|
|
#24 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
bbfa235
(Get the code!)
(In reply to comment #21)
>
> Hmmm, but the patch doesn't have two consecutive lines with ".orig" as
> you describe above. From observation, the first three lines for each
> modified file are similar to
>
> diff -u openssh-
> --- openssh-
> +++ openssh-5.8p1/kex.c 2011-02-11 18:14:03.396688000 -0500
Um. Are we looking at the same file? Here are the first three lines of your most recent patch (attachment 2008, in comment #19):
--- openssh-
+++ openssh-
@@ -49,6 +49,7 @@
> Are you using the GNU patch? The attached patch text works for me with
> no changes whatsoever. Or to ask it somewhat differently, does your
> `patch' process WRONG even though the text is actually CORRECT? Is it
> possible that your`patch' is not ignoring the "diff" line?
This is on an Ubuntu Linux system:
host:/tmp/
patching file kex.c.orig
Hunk #1 FAILED at 49.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 367.
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file kex.c.orig.rej
patching file packet.c.orig
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1025.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 1035.
Hunk #3 FAILED at 1100.
3 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file packet.c.orig.rej
[...]
If I edit each "+++" line in the patch, it applies cleanly.
> I submit hosts, one per line, as the data to ssh-keyscan and am not
> familiar with the "alias" format. In fact, your comments clarified it
> somewhat for me. If you meant that "10.0.0.1" was seen in stderr and
> the others weren't, I believe that this is the "correct" behavior if
> ssh-keyscan had success with "10.0.0.1". I think the code tells me
> that it stops looking after the first IP/host with which it has
> success.
Okay, that seems reasonable. (Yes, I only saw 10.0.0.1 and not the other two.)
The sample "Input format" line in the ssh-keyscan man page has two IP addresses in the first column, though the semantics of this are left unexplained. My assumption is that it's meant for hosts with round-robined DNS names, where the SSH server at each address uses the same host keys. (Which would be consistent with what you describe.)