On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 03:00:42PM +0200, Fay Stegerman wrote: > > (thanks again!), am I correct to assume that thus there's no need > > to file a seperate bug against libscout? > It's generating a broken ZIP file with duplicate entries. It really shouldn't > be doing that, regardless of whether we can extract the files nonetheless. > That's still a bug that should be reported and fixed.
ok, will do, mostly using this bug as reference, thanks!
> > (which is nice, though maybe could only been shown once?)
> Ah. It correctly shows that twice as there could be differences between the
> two
> files being compared wrt whether they have duplicate entries (and if so how
> many).
>
> And if you run 'diffoscope foo.zip bar.zip' it'll show those two different
> file
> names. But in this case we have nested archives and the path (and in this
> case
> also the number of duplicate entries) is identical for both, so maybe we can
> tweak the output to show which top-level file it belongs to?
yes.
:)
> > though this later is done using diffoscope from unstable while the
> > rest of the userland is bullseye, so this might be expected as well?
> Ah. Looks like zipdetails(1) on bullseye doesn't support the --redact,
> --scan,
> and --utc options yet.
right, thanks for confirming in detail!
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄
Dance like no one's watching. Encrypt like everyone is.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
