(no commit message)

[ikiwiki.git] / doc / bugs / Checksum_errors_on_the_pristine-tar_branch.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/bugs/Checksum_errors_on_the_pristine-tar_branch.mdwn b/doc/bugs/Checksum_errors_on_the_pristine-tar_branch.mdwn
index 112f0c2d76144baf2ebf3b6b06f2c74aaed5a83c..4fc2855ee75ffc165e4db15df1d2c298d0431dc7 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/bugs/Checksum_errors_on_the_pristine-tar_branch.mdwn
+++ b/doc/bugs/Checksum_errors_on_the_pristine-tar_branch.mdwn
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ I'm in the process of installing ikiwiki on my home page (hooray), and wants to
 > Downloading the tarball from Debian is the other recommended way to
 > [[download]] the source code. --[[smcv]]
 
 > Downloading the tarball from Debian is the other recommended way to
 > [[download]] the source code. --[[smcv]]
 

+>> Thanks for your responses, smcv. I'll use that method and install the newest version when I'm more familiar with the way ikiwiki works. For now I'm using version 3.20100122 installed with apt-get. Works great so far, but I'm looking forward to the new install. -- [[sunny256]] 2011-02-22 19:30+0100
+

 But I'm unable to recreate the newest `.tar` file, in fact there's errors in all these `.tar.gz` files on that branch:
 
 * `ikiwiki_2.20.tar.gz`
 But I'm unable to recreate the newest `.tar` file, in fact there's errors in all these `.tar.gz` files on that branch:
 
 * `ikiwiki_2.20.tar.gz`


@@ -39,9 +41,46 @@ The operation fails on these files with a "Checksum validation failed" error fro
 > complains, but the tarball is produced successfully. However, I do see actual
 > failures for 2.62 and 2.62.1, for instance. --[[smcv]]
 
 > complains, but the tarball is produced successfully. However, I do see actual
 > failures for 2.62 and 2.62.1, for instance. --[[smcv]]
 

+> Yes, on Debian unstable I got failures on only old ones, but not in
+> contiguous blocks: --[[Joey]] 
+> 
+>     ikiwiki_2.20.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.30.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.31.1.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.46.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.47.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.48.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.49.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.50.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.51.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.62.1.tar.gz
+>     ikiwiki_2.62.tar.gz
+>
+> Probably what would help debug this problem is if someone can
+> reproduce with one or more of the other ones that do **not** fail
+> for me, pass `-dk` to pristine-tar, and send me a copy of its temp directory
+> (joey@kitenet.net), and the versions of pristine-tar, tar, gzip.
+> Then I can compare the good and bad recreated
+> tarballs and identify the difference. Or pass them to the tar developers,
+> who have helped before.
+> 
+> The only cause that I can think of is that perhaps tar's output
+> has changed compared with the version used to create those. The
+> only tar output change I know of involved filenames that were
+> exactly 100 bytes long -- and pristine-tar 1.11 works around that
+> when run with tar 1.25-2 on Debian. FWIW, I am only seeing
+> this in ikiwiki's pristine-tar info, not other packages'. 
+> (Checked all of debhelper's and alien's and etckeeper's 
+> and pristine-tar's tarballs.) --[[Joey]]
+>
+>> It looks as though I only get the same failures as you, so that's no help
+>> (reassuring, though, since we're presumably both running recent Debian).
+>> sunny256's failure cases might just result from the older tar and pristine-tar
+>> on Ubuntu 10.04? --[[smcv]]
+

 A complete output of the "pristine-tar checkout" of all files is stored on <https://gist.github.com/836720> .
 
 A complete output of the "pristine-tar checkout" of all files is stored on <https://gist.github.com/836720> .
 

-For now, I'll download the `.tar.gz` from <http://packages.debian.org/unstable/source/ikiwiki>, or maybe install `ikiwiki_3.20110124_all.deb`. Would you recommend using that `.deb` file on Ubuntu 10.04.2 LTS, or is it Debian-specific? -- sunny256 2011-02-21 08:42+0100
+For now, I'll download the `.tar.gz` from <http://packages.debian.org/unstable/source/ikiwiki>, or maybe install `ikiwiki_3.20110124_all.deb`. Would you recommend using that `.deb` file on Ubuntu 10.04.2 LTS, or is it Debian-specific? -- [[sunny256]] 2011-02-21 08:42+0100

 
 > The .deb from Debian unstable is likely to work on Ubuntu; I've
 > generally been able to compile snapshots on Debian unstable and
 
 > The .deb from Debian unstable is likely to work on Ubuntu; I've
 > generally been able to compile snapshots on Debian unstable and