On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 10:56:33PM +0200, Carsten Schoenert wrote: > Hi Antonio, > > thanks for your quick feedback! > > Am 19.09.21 um 21:24 schrieb Antonio Terceiro: > > > Looking from my side, the tarball from the archive (apt source > > python-django-js-asset) and the one generated by pristine-tar are > > identical: > > > > 4b6a2c8625b8e96bbc4ff1588a27238d7d418b03 /tmp/python-django-js-asset_1.2.2.orig.tar.gz > > 4b6a2c8625b8e96bbc4ff1588a27238d7d418b03 /tmp/archive/python-django-js-asset_1.2.2.orig.tar.gz > > > > From reading the REJECT email, I think it implies that the .dsc/.changes > > you uploaded refer to an orig tarball with 6360 bytes. Do you still have > > the exact artifacts that you uploaded? > > No, not completely. > But I played around a bit with gbp and pristine-tar too and I was able to > recreate a tarball which has the same size and the same hashes as the > *.tar.gz in the archive and the one you've posted by using pristine-tar > manually. > > If I clean out all completely and build the package from scratch by gbp I > get again a wrong size and of course also different hashes. > > Currently I've no real clue why gbp is creating here different results, will > look again at this once Guido is around, I'm sure he can blame me that I'm > doing something wrong. :P That's because gbp does not use pristine-tar by default, and debian/gbp.conf was missing `pristine-tar=True`. Just pushed a commit to fix that.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature