tag 77934 notabug
close 77934
stop
On 20/04/2025 00:44, William Johnson via GNU coreutils Bug Reports wrote:
Hello. I would like to report a bug for md5sum coreutil.
If filename has ‘\t’ in filename, stdout for md5sum result will start with
backslash symbol.
* My version of md5sum util
On Sat, Apr 19, 2025, at 17:44, William Johnson via GNU coreutils Bug Reports
wrote:
>
> Hello. I would like to report a bug for md5sum coreutil.
> If filename has ‘\t’ in filename, stdout for md5sum result will start
> with backslash symbol.
>
> [ ... ]
>
This is docu
Hello. I would like to report a bug for md5sum coreutil.
If filename has ‘\t’ in filename, stdout for md5sum result will start with
backslash symbol.
* My version of md5sum util:
md5sum --version
md5sum (GNU coreutils) 8.32
* Set of commands to reproduce:
$ touch hello
$ touch hello\t\\t
Improved version.
diff --git a/src/digest.c b/src/digest.c
index e8d5ded33..e760afab3 100644
--- a/src/digest.c
+++ b/src/digest.c
@@ -1178,7 +1178,7 @@ digest_check (char const *checkfile_name)
error (EXIT_FAILURE, 0, _("%s: too many checksum lines"),
quotef (checkfile_na
On Tue, Oct 17, 2023, at 02:22, Simon Richter M. Sc. wrote:
>
> No that doesn't make sense, this can't be intended behaviour, even if
> you escape the backslash there should be no backslash in the beginning
> of the checksum!
>
It is intended and documented as such. From coreutils.info (9.3):
No that doesn't make sense, this can't be intended behaviour, even if
you escape the backslash there should be no backslash in the beginning
of the checksum!
On 13.10.23 16:21, Pádraig Brady wrote:
tag 66519 notabug
close 66519
stop
On 13/10/2023 13:31, Simon Richter M. Sc. wrote:
I noticed
tag 66519 notabug
close 66519
stop
On 13/10/2023 13:31, Simon Richter M. Sc. wrote:
I noticed some broken checksums with leading backslash and wrong
filenames in my checksum files because the original filenames contained
a backslash.
Way to reproduce:
% touch test\\test.file
% b2sum test\\test.
I noticed some broken checksums with leading backslash and wrong
filenames in my checksum files because the original filenames contained
a backslash.
Way to reproduce:
% touch test\\test.file
% b2sum test\\test.file
expected output:
786a02f742015903c6c6fd852552d272912f4740e15847618a86e217f71f5
Ok, missed that bit. My bad.
Cheers,
On 10/29/20 4:22 PM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> On Thursday, October 29, 2020 11:41:03 AM CET Alessandro Forghieri wrote:
>> Greetings.
>>
>> Just stumbled upon this:
>>
>> *# md5sum
>> ./Development/rss/rss/STAGING/BATTITI
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 11:41:03 AM CET Alessandro Forghieri wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> Just stumbled upon this:
>
> *# md5sum
> ./Development/rss/rss/STAGING/BATTITI_del_27_11_2016_-_Battiti_Live:_Arsene_
> Duevi\\Roberto_Zanisi.mp3 \d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
&g
I forgot to add, sha1sum, sha256sum and I'm guessing (but did not test)
all the other *sum utils behave similarly.
On 10/29/20 11:41 AM, Alessandro Forghieri wrote:
>
> Greetings.
>
> Just stumbled upon this:
>
> *# md5sum
> ./Development/rss/rss/STAGING/BATTITI_del
Greetings.
Just stumbled upon this:
*# md5sum
./Development/rss/rss/STAGING/BATTITI_del_27_11_2016_-_Battiti_Live:_Arsene_Duevi\\Roberto_Zanisi.mp3
\d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
./Development/rss/rss/STAGING/BATTITI_del_27_11_2016_-_Battiti_Live:_Arsene_Duevi\\Roberto_Zanisi.mp3*
*# cp
Not sure I have much useful to add, though per your example, it does seem
surprising that the first output field can differ between
md5sum "$filename"
and
md5sum < "$filename"
Perhaps especially so since that only very rarely happens, and in all
likelihood vi
eeds escapes, as far as I can see.)
Right. But it was available to clue in the md5sum and others that the
file name was an "unsafe" file name and was going to be escaped there.
> Not sure I would have chosen this, but it can't really be changed
> now. But, I suspect that a
e were even one example. If so,
perhaps it could be changed without trouble.
In any case, thanks very much for your explanation.
Regards,
Mike
-Original Message-
From: Bob Proulx
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 08:53 PM
To: Michael Coleman
Cc: 41...@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#416
Hello Michael,
Michael Coleman wrote:
> $ true > \\
> $ md5sum \\
> \d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e \\
> $ md5sum < \\
> d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e -
Thank you for the extremely good example! It's excellent.
> The checksum is not what I would expect, d
Apologies if this has already been fixed, but glancing at the source, probably
not.
For version 8.22:
$ true > \\
$ md5sum \\
\d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e \\
$ md5sum < \\
d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e -
The checksum is not what I would expect, due to the leading backslash.
can't think of, but you may have.
The original forwarded messaged said the following:
"md5sum is a part of the GNU coreutils package, [...]
It was ported by the gnuwin32 Project to Windows: [...]
The cause of the error you've reported is probably the fact the
gnuwi
05 AM, GNU bug Tracking System wrote:
This is an automatic notification regarding your bug report
#31554: Fwd: Re: Potential bug in md5sum,
which was filed against the coreutils package.
Thank you for your report, which has now been closed.
You can view the full report at
http://debbugs.gnu.or
close 31554
stop
(triaging old bugs)
On 2018-05-22 7:00 p.m., Paul Eggert wrote:
On 05/22/2018 07:52 AM, Riedy, Bill wrote:
I believe I've found a bug in md5sum when it attempts to calculate on
a hard linked file in NTFS on Windows 7.
Could be, but this doesn't look like it
severity 26002 wishlist
tags 26002 wontfix
close 26002
stop
(triaging old bugs)
On 07/03/17 01:04 AM, Michael Vogt wrote:
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 08:26:07PM -0800, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 05/03/17 23:55, Michael Vogt wrote:
[..]
`md5sum /etc/papersize 2> /dev/null | awk '{
(triaging old bugs)
Hello,
A new "base32" program was added coreutils version 8.25 (released 2016).
Now it is easy to run something like:
sha1sum ... | cut -f1 -d' ' | xxd -r -p | base32
As such (after 8 and a half years), I'm marking this as "closed".
Discussion can continue by replying
On 05/22/2018 07:52 AM, Riedy, Bill wrote:
I believe I've found a bug in md5sum when it attempts to calculate on
a hard linked file in NTFS on Windows 7.
Could be, but this doesn't look like it's relevant to the current
codebase for GNU coreutils. 2005 was a looong time ago.
I believe I've found a bug in md5sum when it attempts to calculate on a
hard linked file in NTFS on Windows 7. Please read below for details.
Forwarded Message
Subject:Re: Potential bug in md5sum
Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 19:22:32 +0200
From: Mathias Michaeli
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 08:26:07PM -0800, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 05/03/17 23:55, Michael Vogt wrote:
[..]
> > `md5sum /etc/papersize 2> /dev/null | awk '{print $1}'`
> > `md5sum /etc/lsb-release | cut -d" " -f1`
> > $(md5sum /etc/networks |
On 05/03/17 23:55, Michael Vogt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is a bit of a RFC (anlong with a patch). I would like to have an
> option in md5sum (and friends) that displays only the digest without
> the filename. The use-case is mostly package maintainer scripts. They
> often need
Hi,
this is a bit of a RFC (anlong with a patch). I would like to have an
option in md5sum (and friends) that displays only the digest without
the filename. The use-case is mostly package maintainer scripts. They
often need the md5sum to e.g. check if a conffile has changed and use
patterns like
> Can you strace -o /tmp/md5sum.strace md5sum file_2,
> and look towards the end of the strace file to identify the syscall
> returning EINVAL?
It is the seventh and eighth lines below:
...
read(3,
"\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0".
On 09/12/16 15:45, Jaime Gaspar wrote:
> --- Bug ---
> In a FAT32 file system, if one runs md5sum on a 4,294,967,294-byte file (one
> byte less than the maximum file size) it succeeds, but if one runs md5sum on
> a 4,294,967,295-byte file (the maximum file size) it fails with e
tag 25149 notabug
close 25149
stop
On 09/12/16 18:28, Jaime Gaspar wrote:
>read(3,
> "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"..., 32768)
> = 32767
OK we've read all we can, but to verify md5sum will do:
fread(buffer + 32767, 1, 1, stream
--- Bug ---
In a FAT32 file system, if one runs md5sum on a 4,294,967,294-byte file (one
byte less than the maximum file size) it succeeds, but if one runs md5sum on a
4,294,967,295-byte file (the maximum file size) it fails with error message
"Invalid argument".
--- How to reprodu
tag 23277 notabug
thanks
On 04/12/2016 07:17 AM, Ulrich Sibiller wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I observe a strange behaviour for {md5,sha1,sha512}sum on RHEL 6.7:
>
> # sha512sum dat_files/1.000e-01*dat
> a66f6f8f8da256d07330a17bea942bba9584e182799dce2a42bc7e882d4d9267c40568644d7f5b63128b286a6393764fc599c
Hello,
I observe a strange behaviour for {md5,sha1,sha512}sum on RHEL 6.7:
# sha512sum dat_files/1.000e-01*dat
a66f6f8f8da256d07330a17bea942bba9584e182799dce2a42bc7e882d4d9267c40568644d7f5b63128b286a6393764fc599cc30f687b8dacf86e0a96d87795c
dat_files/1.000e-01.dat
\a66f6f8f8da256d07330a17bea942
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 23/11/15 16:41, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> I think a common expected usage of --ignore-missing would be
>> the case of an SHA1SUM file listing all possibly-verified files for
>> which it is common to verify only the one or two downloaded files
om 65861779310825e36e8a0ce54f3c816167bc36ae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?P=C3=A1draig=20Brady?=
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 17:11:26 +
Subject: [PATCH] md5sum,sha*sum: ensure --ignore-missing fails when no files
verified
* src/md5sum.c (digest_check): Update a matched_checksums bool
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 23/11/15 16:05, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I'll push a bit later today.
>>>
>>> Pushed at
>>> http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=v8.24-91-g9fd0662
>>> Marki
On 23/11/15 16:05, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> I'll push a bit later today.
>>
>> Pushed at
>> http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=v8.24-91-g9fd0662
>> Marking http://bugs.gnu.org/15604 done
>
> Given how this warns/fai
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> I'll push a bit later today.
>
> Pushed at
> http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=v8.24-91-g9fd0662
> Marking http://bugs.gnu.org/15604 done
Given how this warns/fails when using --check does nothing,
$ :|sha1sum
> I'll push a bit later today.
Pushed at
http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=v8.24-91-g9fd0662
Marking http://bugs.gnu.org/15604 done
On 28/10/15 06:40, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 10/27/2015 06:21 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 26/10/15 07:11, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>>> BTW: I was quite surprised to see that the other utilities -
>>> sha{224,256,384,512}sum - don't have a single negative test.
>>> I mean, there should be at le
On 10/27/2015 06:21 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 26/10/15 07:11, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> BTW: I was quite surprised to see that the other utilities -
>> sha{224,256,384,512}sum - don't have a single negative test.
>> I mean, there should be at least one case for each of these
>> utilities to ch
On 26/10/15 07:11, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 10/26/2015 02:51 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> From 5e3d017e7bc66cf6f666160f774944c2ff52d1ae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: =?UTF-8?q?P=C3=A1draig=20Brady?=
>> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:26:04 +
>> Subject: [PATCH] md5
On 10/26/2015 02:51 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> From 5e3d017e7bc66cf6f666160f774944c2ff52d1ae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: =?UTF-8?q?P=C3=A1draig=20Brady?=
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:26:04 +
> Subject: [PATCH] md5sum: quote all printed file names
>
> This is especiall
On 25/10/15 18:05, MI wrote:
> Currently, "md5sum -c" gives a cryptic error when the line endings in the
> .md5 file
> are not LF (\x0A). It would be helpful if md5sum would just "do the right"
> and
> understand the 2 other newline standards.
>
> .
Currently, "md5sum -c" gives a cryptic error when the line endings in the .md5 file
are not LF (\x0A). It would be helpful if md5sum would just "do the right" and
understand the 2 other newline standards.
.md5 files created on non-Unix systems may use line endings other tha
On 01/29/2015 08:08 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> [PATCH] doc: clarify the output format for the *sum utilities
+1
Thanks & have a nice day,
Berny
On 29/01/15 16:11, Terry Hoye wrote:
>
> Regarding GNU coreutils 8.12.197-032bbSeptember 2011,
> man md5sum states in part:
> [quote]
> The sums are computed as described in RFC 1321. When checking, the
> input should be a former output of this program. The default
Regarding GNU coreutils 8.12.197-032bb September 2011,
man md5sum states in part:
[quote]
The sums are computed as described in RFC 1321. When checking, the
input should be a former output of this program. The default mode is
to print a line with checksum, a character indicating
tag 17997 notabug
thanks
On 07/11/2014 02:48 AM, xavier.ric...@laposte.net wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I implemented my own MD5 generator.
> It provides the same results as all the online MD5 generators, like for
> instance http://onlinemd5.com/.
>
> But it gives a different resul
erent result than the GNU md5sum tool.
> So I investigated this : it seems that md5sum adds a newline at the end of
> the input !
>
> That is quite easy to test :
> - go to http://onlinemd5.com/, type "test" as text input. The MD5 sum is
> 098f6bcd4621d373cade4e832627b4
Hello,
I implemented my own MD5 generator.
It provides the same results as all the online MD5 generators, like for
instance http://onlinemd5.com/.
But it gives a different result than the GNU md5sum tool.
So I investigated this : it seems that md5sum adds a newline at the end of the
input
tag 17552 notabug
close 17552
stop
On 05/22/2014 06:18 PM, Hamilton, Eric wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>
> I just noticed that md5sum sometimes does not calculate a md5 checksum
> on a file when using wild cards.
>
>
>
> I am running Cygwin64 under Windows7 64-bit and am
tag 15644 notabug
thanks
On 10/18/2013 07:48 AM, joc...@ntlworld.com wrote:
> Hi,
>First, I hope this isn't some strange manifestation of shell
> backslash escaping that has fooled me. I've fiddled around trying to
> eliminate that possibility, but it could still happen. Apologies if it is...
Hi,
First, I hope this isn't some strange manifestation of shell
backslash escaping that has fooled me. I've fiddled around trying to
eliminate that possibility, but it could still happen. Apologies if it is...
Anyway, what I think might be a bug is as follows:
If you use any
On 12/21/2012 12:12 AM, Daniel Santos wrote:
> On 12/20/2012 11:49 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> dd if=/dev/sda3 | pbzip2 -c2 | tee >(md5sum > /tmp/sda3.dat.bzip2.md5) |
>> netcat 192.168.1.123 45678
> Wow! It was worth writing a patch just to discover the >(list) and
&g
Eric Blake wrote:
> In your case, you can do:
>
> dd if=/dev/sda3 | pbzip2 -c2 | tee >(md5sum > /tmp/sda3.dat.bzip2.md5) |
> netcat 192.168.1.123 45678
I would also mention the GNU dd extension status=none which avoids
what is probably the unnecessary for this purpose "
On 12/20/2012 04:51 PM, GNU bug Tracking System wrote:
Your bug report
#13243: [PATCH] enhancement: modify md5sum to allow piping
which was filed against the coreutils package, has been closed.
The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details
On 05/26/2012 11:21 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 05/25/2012 08:23 PM, Anoop Sharma wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> md5sum was made line buffered sometime back. However, cksum was left out of
>> that patch.
>>
>> I tried running the following test on my machine for ck
On 05/25/2012 08:23 PM, Anoop Sharma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> md5sum was made line buffered sometime back. However, cksum was left out of
> that patch.
>
> I tried running the following test on my machine for cksum, on the lines of
> test for md5sum, given in bug archives at:
&
Hi,
md5sum was made line buffered sometime back. However, cksum was left out of
that patch.
I tried running the following test on my machine for cksum, on the lines of
test for md5sum, given in bug archives at:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2009-10/msg00190.html. The
test
tag 11383 notabug
thanks
On 04/30/2012 09:34 AM, CAOBA Support team wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I found what I think is a bug in the *md5sum* command.
>
> When used on a filename with a backslah, the output doesn't look quite the
> same as usual:
>
> # ls -l /tmp/file1
Hi there,
I found what I think is a bug in the *md5sum* command.
When used on a filename with a backslah, the output doesn't look quite the
same as usual:
# ls -l /tmp/file1 '/tmp/file\2'
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2 2012-04-30 17:05 /tmp/file1
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2 2012-04-30 17
Re : bug#10043: ... md5sum ... :
many thansk for a so quick answer ! :-)
Have a nice day
pc
--- En date de : Lun 14.11.11, GNU bug Tracking System a
écrit :
De: GNU bug Tracking System
Objet: bug#10043: closed (Re: bug#10043: md5sum improvment suggestion)
À: "Castet JR"
D
tags 10043 notabug
On 11/14/2011 08:56 AM, Castet JR wrote:
> md5sum improvment suggestion
>
> Let assume this:
>
> find /lib -type f -name '*dll' |head -n5 >a0.a
>
> cat a0.a
>
> /lib/aspell-0.60/context-filter.dll
> /lib/aspell-0.60/email-fil
md5sum improvment suggestion
Let assume this:
find /lib -type f -name '*dll' |head -n5 >a0.a
cat a0.a
/lib/aspell-0.60/context-filter.dll
/lib/aspell-0.60/email-filter.dll
/lib/aspell-0.60/nroff-filter.dll
/lib/aspell-0.60/sgml-filter.dll
/lib/aspell-0.60/tex-filter.dll
:00 2001
>> From: Reuben Thomas
>> Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 16:05:17 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH] md5sum: clarify what is meant by binary/text flag.
>>
>> src/md5sum.c: Clarify that we are talking about input mode.
>> doc/coreutils.texi: Ditto.
&
then also work in the man page after going
> through help2man (perhaps a Unicode non-breaking space would work, but
> it doesn't seem sensible to try!).
>
>>From bd0ed380c7050a1b55fca71da075fd9853442b1c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Reuben Thomas
> Date: Sat, 17 Sep 201
' ' or '*').
First time I've read it I thought "WTF, are they emulating O_TEXT/CRLF
crap by default or what?" I simply wanted to calculate md5sum from
files but the manpage let me think that it does something odd per
default. So I thought about using --binary alwa
=?UTF-8?Q?R=C3=BCdiger?= Meier writes:
> Or in other words you can never validate a ' ' md5sum unless you know
> about the platform which calculated it.
Not exactly. It works transparently if the appropriate translation was done
at the time of the transfer from the original
we need this option, so that --binary can
> > be
>
> md5sum already has a --text option.
Oops, how could I miss that.
>
> > default (like it was meant to be). On systems where text and
> > binary
>
> --binary is already the default where it makes a difference,
> unl
Eric Blake wrote:
> On 09/17/2011 07:50 AM, Rüdiger Meier wrote:
>> Maybe you could start to correct it this way:
>>
>> 1. add option --textmode ...
>
> Rather, --text. But yes, we need this option, so that --binary can be
md5sum already has a --text option.
> de
On 09/17/2011 07:50 AM, Rüdiger Meier wrote:
Maybe you could start to correct it this way:
1. add option --textmode ...
Rather, --text. But yes, we need this option, so that --binary can be
default (like it was meant to be). On systems where text and binary are
identical (per POSIX), you w
ng
through help2man (perhaps a Unicode non-breaking space would work, but
it doesn't seem sensible to try!).
>From bd0ed380c7050a1b55fca71da075fd9853442b1c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Reuben Thomas
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 16:05:17 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] md5sum: clarify what is meant by b
On Saturday 17 September 2011, Rüdiger Meier wrote:
> On Saturday 17 September 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
> > I hate the way md5sum currently works. What we _should_ have done
> > is make binary normal,
> > [...]
> > I've had ideas of how to change things for several
On Saturday 17 September 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
> I hate the way md5sum currently works. What we _should_ have done is
> make binary normal, and do a new symbol for O_TEXT being non-zero.
> That way, the only platforms where it matters (such as cygwin) would
> default to binary,
the opening line, and this is possible
> because the contents of the quotes is a normal space. A non-breaking
> space is needed. And preferably the explanation I suggested, since ` '
> is apt to be mistaken for `'.
>
>> However, "... indicating type" refers to
needed. And preferably the explanation I suggested, since ` '
is apt to be mistaken for `'.
> However, "... indicating type" refers to "type of checksum line",
> or "type to be used for", not the type of the file. It controls how
> md5sum opens the f
On 09/17/2011 07:10 AM, Rüdiger Meier wrote:
On Saturday 17 September 2011, Reuben Thomas wrote:
Secondly, looking at the code, this isn't really what md5sum does.
Rather, it prints '*' if in binary mode (--binary, or if O_BINARY is
non-zero), and ' ' if in text mode (
"type of checksum line",
or "type to be used for", not the type of the file. It controls how
md5sum opens the file, but only on systems for which O_BINARY makes
a difference (which means it's not worth much discussion for
unix/linux/gnu-centric documentation).
> Secondly,
On Saturday 17 September 2011, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> Secondly, looking at the code, this isn't really what md5sum does.
> Rather, it prints '*' if in binary mode (--binary, or if O_BINARY is
> non-zero), and ' ' if in text mode (--text, or if O_BINARY is zero)
aking, and preferably
explained, as in "` ' (a space)". If you agree, I'll make a patch for
the info and man page.
Secondly, looking at the code, this isn't really what md5sum does.
Rather, it prints '*' if in binary mode (--binary, or if O_BINARY is
non-zero), and '
On 09/14/2011 11:43 PM, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
> 2011.09.14 17:12, Jim Meyering rašė:
>> Good point. I don't see a way to make GNU md5sum handle this automatically
>> and safely. However, that's not a big deal: it's easy to convert from one
>> format to the othe
he workaround is easy as you suggest:
>
> sed 's/ / /' files.md5 | md5sum -c
>
> However that is not easily discoverable.
> I'm 50:50, so I'll think a bit more.
> Hmm I might just document in info that
> the checksum utilities are compatible with
> the BSD ones when processed like:
>
> md5 -r files... | sed 's/ / /' > files.md5
Whichever you prefer.
2011.09.14 17:12, Jim Meyering rašė:
Good point. I don't see a way to make GNU md5sum handle this
automatically and safely. However, that's not a big deal: it's easy to
convert from one format to the other using sed or perl. I'd be
inclined to mark this "wontfix"
;>
>>>> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 23:27:24 +0100, Pádraig Brady
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 03/10/10 20:24, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a little problem with md5sum.
>>>>>>
&g
wrote:
>>>> On 03/10/10 20:24, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a little problem with md5sum.
>>>>>
>>>>> A FreeBSD box generates an md5 sum of a file, which I'm later trying to
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I have a little problem with md5sum.
>>>>
>>>> A FreeBSD box generates an md5 sum of a file, which I'm later trying to
>>>> check on a Linux box. The problem is that what FreeBSD's md5 outputs is
>>>
Bob Proulx wrote:
> Arnaud TARDY wrote:
> > [...] but..md5sum are different between Linux and Windows for a same
> > word!! Exemple
> >
> > Linux: echo 'somme' | md5sum
> > result: cc72185f414a55738ee4460aa82802b3
>
> Correct. Don't forget
On 12/26/2010 06:21 PM, Jon Stanley wrote:
>
> I think that you're seeing the difference in line termination
> characters in Linux and Windows. If you just want the characters
> themselves echoed to the command in Linux, you need to use 'echo -n'
> otherwise it gets terminated with a newline.
'ec
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Arnaud TARDY wrote:
> Linux: echo 'somme' | md5sum
> result: cc72185f414a55738ee4460aa82802b3
>
> windows somme
> Result: 3CE6E7F240E6B94C36FD0DDA70C213E9
>
> Can you help me?
I think that you're seeing the difference in line
Arnaud TARDY wrote:
> [...] but..md5sum are different between Linux and Windows for a same
> word!! Exemple
>
> Linux: echo 'somme' | md5sum
> result: cc72185f414a55738ee4460aa82802b3
Correct. Don't forget that echo adds a newline (\n) to the end of the
li
Hi,
I'm a french guy Arnaud TARDY. I used Linux but..md5sum are different
between Linux and Windows for a same word!! Exemple
Linux: echo 'somme' | md5sum
result: cc72185f414a55738ee4460aa82802b3
windows somme
Result: 3CE6E7F240E6B94C36FD0DDA70C213E9
Can you help me?
Thanks.
Arna
t channel.
rsync already checksums internally.
If you want to double check, look at the -c option to md5sum
cheers,
Pádraig.
Hi,
I'm taking daily backup through rsync of about 200gb please tell me any
valid way to check and verify that the backup has been done successfully or
any error please tell me how I should do it.
--
Thanks.
(Ganesh Pathak)
On 16/10/10 20:37, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
>
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 23:27:24 +0100, Pádraig Brady
> wrote:
>> On 03/10/10 20:24, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have a little problem with md5sum.
>>>
>>> A FreeBSD box generates an
On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 23:27:24 +0100, Pádraig Brady
wrote:
> On 03/10/10 20:24, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a little problem with md5sum.
>>
>> A FreeBSD box generates an md5 sum of a file, which I'm later trying to
>> check on a Linux
On 03/10/10 20:24, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a little problem with md5sum.
>
> A FreeBSD box generates an md5 sum of a file, which I'm later trying to
> check on a Linux box. The problem is that what FreeBSD's md5 outputs is
> slightly different f
Hi,
I have a little problem with md5sum.
A FreeBSD box generates an md5 sum of a file, which I'm later trying to
check on a Linux box. The problem is that what FreeBSD's md5 outputs is
slightly different from what Linux's md5sum expects, which makes md5sum
complain. The diffe
Jim Meyering writes:
>
> tags 6056 + moreinfo
I've given all the moreinfo I could. I thought "It's a standards-track RFC"
plus "seen in the wild" would have been enough. And the applications where
it's relevant (Gnutella, Bitzi) are pretty well-kno
gt; and thought that this was specific to Internet Archive's tools
> and so not appropriate for inclusion.
>
> Could you give examples of where you would
> find this useful?
I wondered that, too.
> I also notice that it was easy enough to
> write base32 wrappers for thes
1 - 100 of 239 matches
Mail list logo
