Bug#767253: Please provide hashes for uncompressed Translation-*
Control: tag -1 +pending
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 07:25:09PM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 07:53:32PM +0100, Michael Vogt wrote:
>>
>>Having the uncompressed files on the cdrom should not be needed, apt
>>should simply fetch the compressed ones if the uncompressed ones are
>>missing. It does need the hash of the uncompressed one in the Release
>>so that it can verify that it matches after the uncompression.
>
>OK, cool. I'll admit to being curious - why does it want both
>compressed and uncompressed? Is there a worry about corruption, maybe?
>
>>Having something stronger than gzip is certainly a good idea, apt
>>should deal just fine with .xz. If its easy for you then maybe we
>>could generate a netinst image with the above changes (plus switching
>>to .xz) and I can test against the current apt and fix (potential)
>>issue on my side. Alternatively if you could give me a quick hint how
>>to generate a netinst (or similar iso) I can try to generate a
>>testimage myself.
>
>I'll do a test this evening on pettersson and give you a download
>link.
I've taken your changes, tested and fixed things up (minor issue in
remove_uncompressed()) and pushed to git now. I've built a netinst and
things look OK on a test install. The changes should be in the next
normal Jessie daily build for you to work with.
There's a little more work to follow up on now. Looking at the sizes
of the index files using gzip and using xz, the difference isn't
actually that large. What's bigger is the difference from not having
the uncompressed versions in the image. That's very handy, as it means
we'll get slightly more on our CDs (yay!), but I'll need to hack on
the code more to account for that properly... :-)
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"Every time you use Tcl, God kills a kitten." -- Malcolm Ray
Reply to: