Your message dated Wed, 7 Oct 2026 12:11:19 -0300
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: trixie-pu: package jdupes/dupes_1.28.0-1+deb13u2
has caused the Debian Bug report #1148496,
regarding trixie-pu: package jdupes/dupes_1.28.0-1+deb13u2
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
1148496: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1148496
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: trixie
X-Debbugs-Cc: [email protected], Jody Bruchon <[email protected]>
Control: affects -1 + src:jdupes
User: [email protected]
Usertags: pu
[ Reason ]
Jody Bruchon, the jdupes author, told me that the hash database feature is
disabled due to a conditional logic error introduced in v1.28.0 during the
major hashdb changes.
The condition was inadvertently written with the opposite logic, completely
disabling the hash database functionality.
[ Impact ]
This does not affect the correctness of jdupes results or pose any data
integrity risk, but causes a significant performance regression, especially
when processing large, unchanging datasets where the hash database provides
substantial performance improvements.
Several Debian packages use jdupes during the package build process.
[ Tests ]
Some manual tests were performed to confirm that the package works fine after
fixing the issue.
[ Risks ]
This is a small and straightforward change provided by upstream, with no
expected risks.
[ Checklist ]
[x] *all* changes are documented in the d/changelog
[x] I reviewed all changes and I approve them
[x] attach debdiff against the package in (old)stable
[x] the issue is verified as fixed in unstable
[ Changes ]
A small patch provided by upstream was applied. This fix is closing the bug
#1148491.
[ Other info ]
No more info.
diff -Nru jdupes-1.28.0/debian/changelog jdupes-1.28.0/debian/changelog
--- jdupes-1.28.0/debian/changelog 2025-10-05 22:45:33.000000000 -0300
+++ jdupes-1.28.0/debian/changelog 2026-09-19 23:18:35.000000000 -0300
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+jdupes (1.28.0-1+deb13u2) trixie; urgency=medium
+
+ * debian/patches/030_fix-hashdb.patch: created to fix a conditional logic
+ error that disabled the hash database feature, resulting in a significant
+ performance regression for large, unchanging datasets. Thanks to Jody
+ Bruchon <[email protected]> (upstream). (Closes: #1148491)
+
+ -- Joao Eriberto Mota Filho <[email protected]> Sat, 19 Sep 2026 23:18:35
-0300
+
jdupes (1.28.0-1+deb13u1) trixie; urgency=medium
* debian/patches/020_fix-uniq-count.patch: created to fix flag overlap
diff -Nru jdupes-1.28.0/debian/patches/030_fix-hashdb.patch
jdupes-1.28.0/debian/patches/030_fix-hashdb.patch
--- jdupes-1.28.0/debian/patches/030_fix-hashdb.patch 1969-12-31
21:00:00.000000000 -0300
+++ jdupes-1.28.0/debian/patches/030_fix-hashdb.patch 2026-09-19
23:18:35.000000000 -0300
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+Description: Fix a conditional logic error that disables the hash database
feature
+ The incorrect condition was introduced in v1.28.0 and caused the
+ hash database to be completely disabled.
+Author: Jody Bruchon <[email protected]>
+Origin: upstream
+Bug-Debian: https://bugs.debian.org/1148491
+Last-Update: 2026-09-02
+Index: jdupes-1.28.0/hashdb.c
+===================================================================
+--- jdupes-1.28.0.orig/hashdb.c
++++ jdupes-1.28.0/hashdb.c
+@@ -530,19 +530,24 @@ int read_hashdb_entry(file_t *file)
+ if (file == NULL || file->d_name == NULL) goto error_null;
+ if (get_path_hash(file->d_name, file->d_name_len, &path_hash) != 0) goto
error_path_hash;
+ bucket = path_hash & HT_MASK;
+- if (hashdb[bucket] == NULL) return 0;
++ if (hashdb[bucket] == NULL) goto end_read_hashdb;
+ cur = hashdb[bucket];
+ while (1) {
+ if (cur->path_hash != path_hash) {
+ if (path_hash < cur->path_hash) cur = cur->left;
+ else cur = cur->right;
+- if (cur == NULL) return 0;
++ if (cur == NULL) goto end_read_hashdb;
+ continue;
+ }
+ /* Found a matching path hash */
+- if (cur->pathlen == file->d_name_len && memcmp(cur->path, file->d_name,
cur->pathlen) == 0) {
++ LOUD(fprintf(stderr, "read_hashdb_entry: found a matching path hash\n");)
++ if ((cur->pathlen != file->d_name_len) || (memcmp(cur->path,
file->d_name, cur->pathlen) != 0)) {
++ LOUD(fprintf(stderr, "read_hashdb_entry: name check failed, not
populating (%u != %u, '%s' != '%s', cmp %d)\n",
++ cur->pathlen, file->d_name_len,
++ cur->path, file->d_name,
++ memcmp(cur->path, file->d_name, cur->pathlen));)
+ cur = cur->left;
+- if (cur == NULL) return 0;
++ if (cur == NULL) goto end_read_hashdb;
+ continue;
+ } else {
+ /* Found a matching path too but check mtime */
+@@ -552,10 +557,12 @@ int read_hashdb_entry(file_t *file)
+ if (cur->size != file->size) exclude |= 4;
+ if (exclude != 0) {
+ /* Invalidate if something has changed */
++ LOUD(fprintf(stderr, "read_hashdb_entry: metadata changed,
invalidating entry\n");)
+ cur->hashcount = 0;
+ hashdb_dirty = 1;
+ return -1;
+ }
++ LOUD(fprintf(stderr, "read_hashdb_entry: copying hash data to file
entry\n");)
+ file->filehash_partial = cur->partialhash;
+ if (cur->hashcount == 2) {
+ file->filehash = cur->fullhash;
+@@ -564,6 +571,9 @@ int read_hashdb_entry(file_t *file)
+ return 1;
+ }
+ }
++
++end_read_hashdb:
++ LOUD(fprintf(stderr, "read_hashdb_entry: exhausted hash scan\n");)
+ return 0;
+
+ error_null:
diff -Nru jdupes-1.28.0/debian/patches/series
jdupes-1.28.0/debian/patches/series
--- jdupes-1.28.0/debian/patches/series 2025-10-05 22:45:33.000000000 -0300
+++ jdupes-1.28.0/debian/patches/series 2026-09-19 23:18:35.000000000 -0300
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
010_fix-FTBFS-Hurd.patch
020_fix-uniq-count.patch
+030_fix-hashdb.patch
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am closing this trixie-pu because we have issues with i386 CI tests.
I will wait for a solution from upstream.
Eriberto
--- End Message ---
