On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 05:32:58PM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Several of the jigdo files I'm creating end up using the following file:
>
> LV13Ru06DGf3YL3ExzFEfw=Debian:pool/main/l/lablgl/liblablgl-ocaml_1.01-2_mips.deb
That checksum is incorrect! :-/ This .deb has a checksum of
QYrvxbZD6hsrbVCjL1sAWQ on all the mirrors I've checked.
The reason for that problem is probably an inconsistent jigdo cache file. Run
jigdo-file --cache ~/jigdo-cache.db md5
/mymirror/pool/main/l/lablgl/liblablgl-ocaml_1.01-2_mips.deb
to verify this. If the wrong sum ("LV...") is printed, touch the file and
repeat the command.
Of course, the "better safe than sorry" approach would be to delete
~/jigdo-cache.db, but it'll take a while to rebuild... :-/
I've downloaded your template file and at first sight "jigdo-file ls -t
woody-powerpc-1.template" shows some _really_ weird things: Our LV checksum
appears in numerous places all over the image.
[...some intelligent guesses later:]
That LV checksum is the md5 checksum for 53818 bytes of zeroes. :-((
That explains a few things - wherever there are longer stretches of zeroes
in the image, references to the zero file are repeated many times.
More importantly, if such an entry made its way into the jigdo cache, this
means that jigdo-file will slow to an absolute crawl for any images which
contain larger stretches of zeroes - such as the DVD images!! :-( This
might explain why you haven't been quite that content with jigdo-file's
performance of late!
So how did the all-0 entry end up in jigdo-file's cache? I have no idea,
and this looks like one of those horrible bugs which are impossible to
find. :-/
One possible reason which would allow me to "blame someone else" ;-) would
be that jigdo-file scanned this file for the first time when it was just
being mirrored. Does rsync (or whatever mirror method you use) first set
the extent and timestamp of a file and then transfer the data? Hmm, that
sounds unlikely - any suggestions on how I could track this down?
> I've used JTE to generate the other jigdo files, and it doesn't
> exhibit this problem thankfully...
If you use it for the release images, this will also be a nice way of
testing it and ironing out any remaining bugs - IMHO, this is good since
you said you want to use it for the sarge release images!
I just wish I could find the cause for this problem with jigdo-file. :-/
Cheers,
Richard
--
__ _
|_) /| Richard Atterer | GnuPG key:
| \/¯| http://atterer.net | 0x888354F7
¯ '` ¯
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
