Control: clone 855699 -1 Control: reassign -1 libpsl5 Contro: retitle -1 libpsl should prefer the .dafsa file to the .dat file if they have the same timestamp
Hi Tim-- On Tue 2017-02-21 06:31:57 -0500, Tim Ruehsen wrote: > both, /usr/share/publicsuffix/public_suffix_list.dafsa and > /usr/share/publicsuffix/public_suffix_list.dat have the same file date > (mtime). > > Together with a small glitch in libpsl/psl_latest() this leads to .dat > being loaded which causes lot's of parse/conversion/malloc overhead. whoops, thanks for catching this! > There are two possible solutions: > 1. The .dafsa file should be older than the .dat file by at least 1s. > This makes sense since the .dafsa file is generated from .dat and thus should > be older. as you said in your followup, the .dafsa should be *newer* than the .dat. I'm trying to decide how to package this change most cleanly. The timestamps for the installed files are "clamped" to the timestamp in the debian/changelog entry. This is a relatively new change, in debian, the result of the reproducible-builds policy, which is the right one. Since the build daemons are all going to do the build *after* the debian/changelog entry timestamp, just including a "sleep 1" before invoking psl-make-dafsa won't provide a fix. > Also the .dat file should have the original timestamp from upstream. What timestamp do you mean by this? I don't think that the upstream development includes a specific timestamp aside from those found in the git commit history. Do you mean that the .dat should have timestamp based on the git commit timestamp? if so, which timestamp -- the author timestamp or the committer timestamp? Given that i'm naming the upstream package version number based on the committer timestamp, that might be a reasonable way to choose the timestamp for the .dat file. if we do that, then should we let the .dafsa receive the clamped timestamp of the debian/changelog? or should we explicitly set the .dafsa to the .dat + 1 second? > 2. Apply a 1-line patch to libpsl (already in upstream git repo) which prefers > the distribution (.dafsa) file. I think this is worth applying anyway, since it's the right thing to do. thanks! I've cloned this bug report and reassigned the clone to libpsl to track that. --dkg
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
