Re: Joliet name length in amd64 netinst versus DVD-2
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 08:10:54PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>debian-9.3.0-amd64-netinst.iso was made with xorrisofs option -joliet-long,
>which enable Joliet names longer than 64 characters.
>But production of debian-9.3.0-amd64-DVD-2.iso did not use it.
>
>Whatever setting is finally desirable, it should be the same with all
>Debian ISOs which get a Joliet filesystem tree by option -J.
>
>I stumbled over this by
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/02/msg00388.html:
>
>> From: Serge LAOT <serge.laot@wanadoo.fr>
>> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 18:22:56 +0100
>> [...]
>> I have found some discrepencies between filenames in './pool/main/' and
>> the filenames in 'md5sum.txt'.
>> [...]
>> ./pool/main/m/mono/libmono-compilerservices-symbolwriter4.0-cil_4.6.2.7+dfsg-1_all.deb
>> ./pool/main/m/mono/libmono-compilerservices-symbolwriter4.0-cil_4.6.2.7+dfsg-1_a.deb
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Details:
>
>If i download
> https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/debian-9.3.0-amd64-DVD-2.iso
>and mount it without disabling Rock Ridge, i see the longer name
>
> /mnt/iso/pool/main/m/mono/libmono-compilerservices-symbolwriter4.0-cil_4.6.2.7+dfsg-1_all.deb
>
>If i mount the Joliet tree by "-o norock", i see the truncated name
>
> /mnt/iso/pool/main/m/mono/libmono-compilerservices-symbolwriter4.0-cil_4.6.2.7+dfsg-1_a.deb
>
>This truncation is caused by xorrisofs option -J without a specs relaxation
>option like -joliet-long.
>The truncated length of 65 is correct, because Joliet prescribes 128 bytes
>which suffices for 64 UTF-16 characters. The dot in the name does not
>count for that limit.
>
>Looking at the files .disk/mkisofs of debian-9.3.0-amd64-DVD-2.iso and
>debian-9.3.0-amd64-netinst.iso reveils that netinst had -joliet-long
>whereas DVD-2 had not.
Doh, yes - you've found a clear bug. Fixing it right now, thanks for
the clear report!
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.
Reply to: