[Pkg-netatalk-devel] 3.1.16~ds-1

[Daniel Markstedt]

------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, September 12th, 2023 at 6:23 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <jonas at jones.dk> wrote:


> 
> 
> Quoting Daniel Markstedt (2023-09-12 09:05:39)
> 
> > Hi Jonas,
> > 
> > I have prepared the code changes for 3.1.16~ds-1, with this changelog:
> > https://salsa.debian.org/netatalk-team/netatalk/-/blob/debian/latest/debian/changelog
> > 
> > It should be ready for testing, except I think I messed up the pristine tarball delta generation.
> > The binary delta came out way too large, and debuild complains about binary files that has changed.
> > So I think I made a mistake somewhere working at this too late at night!
> > 
> > In hindsight I should not have pushed to the pristine-tar remote before fully testing:
> > https://salsa.debian.org/netatalk-team/netatalk/-/blob/pristine-tar/netatalk_3.1.16~ds.orig.tar.gz.delta
> > So I guess we may have to revert this and start over. Sorry about the mess!
> > I'll try to look at it again later in the week.
> > 
> > This is what debuild complains about:
> > dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to doc/gfx/logo.png: binary file contents changed
> > dpkg-source: error: add doc/gfx/logo.png in debian/source/include-binaries if you want to store the modified binary in the debian tarball
> > dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to etc/afpd/spotlight-packet.bin: binary file contents changed
> > dpkg-source: error: add etc/afpd/spotlight-packet.bin in debian/source/include-binaries if you want to store the modified binary in the debian tarball
> > dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to etc/afpd/spotlight-packet2.bin: binary file contents changed
> > dpkg-source: error: add etc/afpd/spotlight-packet2.bin in debian/source/include-binaries if you want to store the modified binary in the debian tarball
> > dpkg-source: error: unrepresentable changes to source
> 
> 
> The above indicates either a totally broken set of pristine-tar +
> upstream/latest git branches or an obsolete local auto-generated
> tarball that you simply need to delete to have git-buidpackage generate
> a fresh one properly in sync with corresponding git branches/tags. Try
> the latter first, and if that doesn't work then tell me, and I recommend
> that I try clean up the mess (because it involves either force-pushing
> public git branches or merging to paper over the mess, where I prefer
> the former because the latter can later bite us in the ass due to
> subtleties of how git tries to second-guess evolution of changes.
> 
> 
> - Jonas
> 

You're right, I forgot about the `pristine-tar gentar` step.
Unfortunately, my critical mistake here, I think, is that I generated the delta before removing all of the generated in/m4/h files.
They're included in the upstream tarball but have been purged in upstream/latest ...
This must be why the binary delta is much larger than expected.

So `pristine-tar gentar` fails with the delta because it cannot stat the various Makefile.in files etc.

Please let me know if there's anything else I should try before we (you) try to clean this up...