tinyssh-convert usage error
The CLI for tinyssh-convert was (recently?) changed. Currently, trying to use this package causes:
-> Running build hook: [tinyssh]
tinyssh-convert: usage: tinyssh-convert out-tinysshkeydir < in-opensshfile
https://github.com/grazzolini/mkinitcpio-tinyssh/blob/bd73e32a1685bb843cdfe1300abcad58faba6e88/tinyssh_install#L32
@grazzolini can you please merge this? Thank you very much.
:+1: The patch works like a charm
ping
I tried the patch but the hook still doesn't appear to add the root_key. forum post - https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=2026202
@cmm1107 If you have run mkinitcpio -P once already, the directory /etc/tinyssh/sshkeydir probably already exists. The script then does not work correctly. Delete the directory and try again, you should then see a message that the OpenSSH keys have been successfully converted.
@cmm1107 If you have run
mkinitcpio -Ponce already, the directory/etc/tinyssh/sshkeydirprobably already exists. The script then does not work correctly. Delete the directory and try again, you should then see a message that the OpenSSH keys have been successfully converted.
Thanks @skaldesh did a fresh install with the patch and saw key being added during mkinitcpio.
This is still broken on Arch for me as of today. Applying the patch posted above fixed the issue, but it would be nice if @grazzolini could merge this...
I replaced the check in copy_openssh_keys() for a cleaner install process:
if [ -d $destdir -a -x /usr/bin/tinyssh-convert ]; then
rmdir $destdir
fi
@grazzolini can you please merge please?
Created an issue on the Arch bug tracker to attempt to fork this repo and take ownership of the package, as it seems to have been abandoned.
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/74522?project=1&opened=37246
mkinitcpio-systemd-tool seems to be an alternative.
@grazzolini I understand you no longer use tinyssh as per your comment on the archlinux bug tracker, but how hard is it to review and merge a 6 line PR? Certainly not over 3 years, and likely less time than it took you to write that comment.
@Joseph-DiGiovanni instead of being negative here why don't we just fork it, merge it, package it, publish it, and maintain it in the future.
@bf I can do both. I'll add it to the list of things everyone involved has had to waste their time and effort on so he could avoid a few clicks:
- Submitting a bug on the arch bug tracker
- Having to add a note of this issue to the arch wiki
- Everyone who needs to use this package having to update the script themselves
- Making a fork
- Merging the PR
- Getting the authors attention to update the package since he's also the official package maintainer
If @grazzolini reads this you may update the upstream URL to my fork. Thanks