/usr/bin/smem is also used by app-misc/secure-delete-3.1 Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. emerge -va app-misc/secure-delete 2. emerge -va dev-util/smem Actual Results: portage reports a that /usr/bin/smem is owned by secure-delete Expected Results: both packages schould be installable.
I'm so tempted to remove secure-delete… latest release in 2003 and doesn't work on Journaling filesystems…
Diego, ping
I can CC treecleaners if you want, secure-delete does not work on anything but ext2 at this point, as far as I can tell.
(In reply to comment #3) > I can CC treecleaners if you want, secure-delete does not work on anything > but ext2 at this point, as far as I can tell. What kind of error does it show when used in filesystems with journaling?
I remember reading that it simply did not work out of the box on ext3 (and thus I suppose ext4), but it required a kernel module. Nowadays, ext3/4 iirc have an option to do "secure-delete" at mount time.
I said that because probably some people will be against killing this only for a collision issue :/
I am really using secure-delete for zeroing out my virtual machines. this is needed, because the compressed backup size can be reduced. This works very well on ext4 and btrfs file systems. Since it is working, why should be there another release for holding it in portage tree? Maybe just renaming the binary could make everyone happy?
Created attachment 336032 [details] secure-delete-3.1-r2.ebuild removes /usr/bin/smem file conflict
should be fine now ;)
What alternatives are there when secure-delete is removed?
I think my alternative would be using dd/ddrescue (ddrescue /dev/zero /zerofile.ooo && rm /zerofile.ooo) or just code down a tool which does this in my vms But I really dont see any reason for deleting it. It is in my overlay now, so I (and everyone else of course) can use it from there.
Well, dd/ddrescue doesn't do the multiple overwrites, so it's not a real replacement for original purpose of the package. In the meantime I found a few packages which cover part of the features of the secure-delete package but none that (1) are in portage and (2) do everything that secure-delete does. Sure, srm in itself does not perfectly work on journaling systems, because it doesn't overwrite the journal (which is not discussed in the documentation AFAICS even though the ewarn suggests this) but it's still better than normal rm in that case and it's also still useful for those non-journaling FSs out there (e.g. for cleaning USB sticks with FAT before throwing them away). AFAICT the other tools in the package (sfill, smem, sswap) still work perfectly even though they haven't been updated since 2003. By the way, I found this in the Debian change log for their secure-delete package (which is still there) for the 2010 update to 3.1-5: * Rename smem to sdmem to avoid name clash with smem package
There's a thread on gentoo-dev if you want to check, which points out the shred utility in coreutils as a replacement for srm (including the multipass), as well as an article suggesting that the multipass is basically useless and just voodoo/cargo culting, and a note that smem can't work without help from the kernel (in which case the whole point of the collision is moot, but also the rest of the package is, given shred is there and so on).
Created attachment 336072 [details] secure-delete-3.1-r3.ebuild rename smem -> sdmem (exactly like debian does)
(In reply to comment #7) > I am really using secure-delete for zeroing out my virtual machines. this is > needed, because the compressed backup size can be reduced. > This works very well on ext4 and btrfs file systems. Same here, zeroing out free space on virtual disks before compressing for backups. Found it useful to have inodes zeroed out also, making the image even better compressible. Not updated since 2003 isn't necessarily bad - the program just works and the package maintainers are having an easy life with it. Looks like another package i have to maintain myself from now on..
Please take a look to: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/dev/266520
This also does not solve the problem. Scrub acts overrides my block devices. What we need is a tool like sfill, wich zeroes out ONLY the free space on file system level. I do not know any alternatives. Additionally sfill is available for windows systems, which makes administration quite easy, because one has only to remember one command ;) I really dont know, why we are discussing this. Here are users needing this application. So do NOT remove! If you do not want to maintain that tool, let me become a gentoo dev and I will do.
Ooops, I did not read the whole manpage. Discscrub could be an alternative, since it can operate on filesystem. But I do not think that this is a reason für removing secure-delete. Firefox is an alternative to Chromium, but nobody wants to remove! ;)
I haven't yet seen an explanation in the scrub manpage saying that unused inodes can be zero-filled also. I'm using sfill because it can, otherwise i would just cat /dev/zero >deleteme .. Maybe i should take the secure-delete sourcecode and extract just a simplified version of sfill for that one sole purpose, as scrub seems to fill the other gaps.
Per: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/dev/266551#266551 Looks like this way of doing things are not really ok :/
I've created a simplified replacement for the sfill binary from the secure-delete package. People who also use sfill to prepare virtual disks for backup compression (like i do) might give it a try: http://zerofill.sourceforge.net Fixed a few things & simplified everything to just write zero-bytes once, no secure-deletion aspects considered. The remaining functionality from secure-delete might be covered by scrub, so if the secure-delete packages goes byebye on gentoo, i got what i need. Beware that i've tested it a couple of times but the project is still fresh and should be used with caution for now, even if i've probaly fixed more bugs than i might have added.
I'll pick zerofill up soon(ish), as it's something that could be useful to me as well..
Nice work! Is there any repo for getting the source code, or just the tarball?
Just the tarball. U got something particular in mind?
Well, I clone all projects I am watching or involved in, to have the ability stumbling around in the most recent code. And since its uncommon not hosting a repo, I just asked for the case I failed to see the link! ;)
I know, it's oldschool, but so am I, past all hope.. :P
what about: * sys-fs/zerofree Available versions: (~)1.0.1 Homepage: http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/uml/index.html Description: Zero's out all free space on a filesystem. ?
oh, zerofree cannot act on a rw mounted fs. too bad...
Package removed.
I really do not understand this removal. You could use the fixed ebuild and everything is fine... Anyways, I am hosting secure-delete in my overlay for everyone who is using this!
