From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D2E31FF396 for ; Thu, 23 May 2024 10:26:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 51C5F1AFC7; Thu, 23 May 2024 10:26:19 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <356a77a5-d292-4098-ace5-15a254e264a0@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 10:25:45 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta From: Dominik Csapak To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox Backup Server development discussion References: <20240514141248.1614306-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <20240514141248.1614306-2-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <2b34b96c-5c73-4827-8dac-12f73229b017@proxmox.com> <0441d734-0b35-4093-b9b2-d63168743867@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <0441d734-0b35-4093-b9b2-d63168743867@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.016 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 2/2] tape: write informational MAM attributes on tapes X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" On 5/23/24 10:22, Dominik Csapak wrote: > On 5/23/24 10:10, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: >> btw. enforcing the length might be nice too, what would actually happen if >> one writes more data than reserved by the spec, does it spill into the >> next field, does something catches this and errors out? > > we do enforce this already and fail with an error on writing > (before sending at all) actually reading the code we don't, but i'll send a patch for that _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel