Re: [aur-general] Auto-generated Github tarballs format change (Was: TU Application: Daniel M. Capella)

2018-11-15 Thread Levente Polyak via aur-general
On 11/15/18 10:52 AM, Baptiste Jonglez wrote:
> On 15-11-18, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
>> On 11/14/18 11:50 PM, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general wrote:
>>> Quoting Levente Polyak via aur-general (2018-11-14 17:00:38)
 - tests are awesome <3 run them whenever possible! more is better!
   pulling sources from github is favorable when you get free tests
   and sometimes manpages/docs
>>>
>>> Will work with the upstreams to distribute these. I prefer to use published
>>> offerings as they are what the authors intend to be used. GitHub 
>>> autogenerated
>>> tarballs are also subject to change:
>>> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=151973450514279=2
>>
>> I've seen the occasional *claim* that this happens, but I've yet to see
>> any actual case where this happens and it isn't because of upstream
>> force-pushing a tag.
> 
> See https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/60382 for an example.
> 
> I still had the old archive around so I spent some time comparing it with
> the new one:
> 
> - I compared the checksum of each individual file in the archives, and
>   they were all identical
> 
> - I compared the raw tar files after decompressing, and there were just a
>   few bytes that were moved around
> 
> This really suggests a slight format change in the way the tarball was
> generated (could be file ordering).
> 
> If you want to double check, here they are:
> 
> - old archive from May 2017: 
> https://files.polyno.me/arch/kashmir-20150805-20170525.tar.gz
> 
> - new archive: https://files.polyno.me/arch/kashmir-20150805.tar.gz
> 
> Baptiste
> 

GitHub invalidating caches is not the problem here, they should be
allowed to do it whenever they wish. The root of the issue is
unreproduciblility as already pointed out here.

The tarballs are stable per se if no weird magic applies via git export
rules like dates being exported into files or no force pushes are done
to the tree, they use git archive via tar which itself is reproducible.
In fact, detatched pre-generated tarballs sometimes changes as well so
blame upstream for any such happening (at least nowadays :P).

Anyway, the differences we see here are just our digital legacy where
the format was not reproducible yet.

The example tarball indeed only contains metadata changes related to
ordering of filenames inside the structure. This is definitively stable
today.


PS: You can simply use diffoscope for such analysis, it has been
invented for this very purpose and is not only content but also
meta-data aware.

cheers,
Levente



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] Auto-generated Github tarballs format change (Was: TU Application: Daniel M. Capella)

2018-11-15 Thread Bruno Pagani via aur-general
Le 15/11/2018 à 10:52, Baptiste Jonglez a écrit :
> On 15-11-18, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
>> On 11/14/18 11:50 PM, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general wrote:
>>> Quoting Levente Polyak via aur-general (2018-11-14 17:00:38)
 - tests are awesome <3 run them whenever possible! more is better!
   pulling sources from github is favorable when you get free tests
   and sometimes manpages/docs
>>> Will work with the upstreams to distribute these. I prefer to use published
>>> offerings as they are what the authors intend to be used. GitHub 
>>> autogenerated
>>> tarballs are also subject to change:
>>> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=151973450514279=2
>> I've seen the occasional *claim* that this happens, but I've yet to see
>> any actual case where this happens and it isn't because of upstream
>> force-pushing a tag.
> See https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/60382 for an example.
>
> I still had the old archive around so I spent some time comparing it with
> the new one:
>
> - I compared the checksum of each individual file in the archives, and
>   they were all identical
>
> - I compared the raw tar files after decompressing, and there were just a
>   few bytes that were moved around
>
> This really suggests a slight format change in the way the tarball was
> generated (could be file ordering).
>
> If you want to double check, here they are:
>
> - old archive from May 2017: 
> https://files.polyno.me/arch/kashmir-20150805-20170525.tar.gz
>
> - new archive: https://files.polyno.me/arch/kashmir-20150805.tar.gz
>
> Baptiste

But those are not tag tarballs though.

That being said, yes, the tarball format changed once in the past, on
purpose, so that it could actually be reproducible and allow things like
the “alternative local workflow” of https://wiki.debian.org/Creating
signed GitHub releases. I can’t remember when that happened, but per
this page that was prior to April 2016. And AFAIK, it is not subject to
change again for this exact reason. ;)

Regards,
Bruno




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[aur-general] Auto-generated Github tarballs format change (Was: TU Application: Daniel M. Capella)

2018-11-15 Thread Baptiste Jonglez
On 15-11-18, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 11/14/18 11:50 PM, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general wrote:
> > Quoting Levente Polyak via aur-general (2018-11-14 17:00:38)
> >> - tests are awesome <3 run them whenever possible! more is better!
> >>   pulling sources from github is favorable when you get free tests
> >>   and sometimes manpages/docs
> > 
> > Will work with the upstreams to distribute these. I prefer to use published
> > offerings as they are what the authors intend to be used. GitHub 
> > autogenerated
> > tarballs are also subject to change:
> > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=151973450514279=2
> 
> I've seen the occasional *claim* that this happens, but I've yet to see
> any actual case where this happens and it isn't because of upstream
> force-pushing a tag.

See https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/60382 for an example.

I still had the old archive around so I spent some time comparing it with
the new one:

- I compared the checksum of each individual file in the archives, and
  they were all identical

- I compared the raw tar files after decompressing, and there were just a
  few bytes that were moved around

This really suggests a slight format change in the way the tarball was
generated (could be file ordering).

If you want to double check, here they are:

- old archive from May 2017: 
https://files.polyno.me/arch/kashmir-20150805-20170525.tar.gz

- new archive: https://files.polyno.me/arch/kashmir-20150805.tar.gz

Baptiste


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature