Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> writes: > I admit that the issue might not be very important but I personally like > reproducible results (in the sense of same MD5sums). At least it can > not harm even if I admit that upstream does not care - in some points we > are better than upstream. So why not doing it if it comes cheap?
You won't get back the same MD5 checksum after tar and gzip of the same files, even if you set the UIDs. pristine-tar has various additional code to deal with all the various changes created by the tools. > Well, pristine-tar will not help us here (or am I missing something) > because I'm talking about *re*packaging upstream (for whatever reason). However you generate the .orig.tar.gz file, you can then manage it with pristine-tar, at least if you're using a VCS that pristine-tar supports. The process when you repack upstream is really the same as when you just download upstream from pristine-tar's perspective. > Could you please be more verbose about "other issues with the format"? The big one is that the timestamps will generally change (particularly on directories), and gzip also encodes a timestamp. There are other minor differences generated by minor tool changes. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87lipb6z8l....@windlord.stanford.edu
