Quoting Tyler Hicks (<email address hidden>):
> Re-subscribing ubuntu-sponsors and ubuntu-sru.
>
> The regression scare from Serge was caused by his manual modifications
> to ~/.ecryptfs/Private.sig. He developed a feature for the encrypted
> home mount helper in the past and, most likely during that time, he had
> manually modified his .sig file and left trailing "junk" after his key
> signatures. After removing the offending bytes from his .sig file,
> everything worked as expected for him. It is not
> common/expected/supported for users to manually modify their .sig files
> and I don't expect any user to see the problem that Serge experienced.
More to the point, ignoring the junk could be deemed more wrong than
failing on it, so a hearty +1.
Quoting Tyler Hicks (<email address hidden>): Private. sig. He developed a feature for the encrypted expected/ supported for users to manually modify their .sig files
> Re-subscribing ubuntu-sponsors and ubuntu-sru.
>
> The regression scare from Serge was caused by his manual modifications
> to ~/.ecryptfs/
> home mount helper in the past and, most likely during that time, he had
> manually modified his .sig file and left trailing "junk" after his key
> signatures. After removing the offending bytes from his .sig file,
> everything worked as expected for him. It is not
> common/
> and I don't expect any user to see the problem that Serge experienced.
More to the point, ignoring the junk could be deemed more wrong than
failing on it, so a hearty +1.