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