Opened 3 years ago

Closed 2 years ago

#17862 closed defect (wontfix)

Stop distributing rebuildable files

Reported by: cypherpunks Owned by:
Priority: Low Milestone: Tor: unspecified
Component: Core Tor/Tor Version: Tor: 0.2.4.26
Severity: Minor Keywords:
Cc: Actual Points:
Parent ID: Points:
Reviewer: Sponsor:

Description

The micro-revision.i file is included in the tarballs while the build system is able to rebuild it when it does not exist. Files that can be rebuild should not be included in the tarballs.

I don't know if there are other such files hence the general ticket summary title.

Child Tickets

Attachments (1)

0001-Do-not-distribute-micro-revision.i.patch (760 bytes) - added by cypherpunks 3 years ago.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (13)

comment:1 Changed 3 years ago by nickm

For micro-revision.i, the system is not able to rebuild it when it's building from a tarball. Its purpose is to say which git version the tarball was made from.

Leaving this ticket open to see if there are any other relevant files

comment:2 in reply to:  1 Changed 3 years ago by cypherpunks

Replying to nickm:

For micro-revision.i, the system is not able to rebuild it when it's building from a tarball. Its purpose is to say which git version the tarball was made from.

FWICT the micro-revision.i make rule first tries to see if the directory is a git repository. If it's not, it does nothing. It then checks if micro-revision.i exists and if it doesn't it rebuilds it with an empty string.

comment:3 Changed 3 years ago by nickm

Milestone: Tor: 0.2.???

Changed 3 years ago by cypherpunks

comment:4 Changed 3 years ago by cypherpunks

Status: newneeds_review

Attached a patch to revive this ticket. This patch has been tested with the following steps.

  1. generate a tarball with make dist
  2. verify micro-revision.i is not in the tarball
  3. extract the tarball
  4. and finally, execute ./configure and make check in the extracted directory.

I looked at all of the make rules and could not find any other rules that generate files that are also included in the tarball. It seems micro-revision.i was the only one.

comment:5 Changed 3 years ago by teor

Does micro-revision.i end up empty after your test, or does it have the git version in it?

comment:6 in reply to:  5 ; Changed 3 years ago by cypherpunks

Replying to teor:

Does micro-revision.i end up empty after your test, or does it have the git version in it?

It contains two double quotes ("") because the extracted directory isn't a git directory.

comment:7 in reply to:  6 ; Changed 3 years ago by teor

Replying to cypherpunks:

Replying to teor:

Does micro-revision.i end up empty after your test, or does it have the git version in it?

It contains two double quotes ("") because the extracted directory isn't a git directory.

Based on comment 1, we want that file to be distributed with the git revision in it.
So this is exactly what we don't want.

comment:8 in reply to:  7 Changed 3 years ago by cypherpunks

Replying to teor:

Replying to cypherpunks:

Replying to teor:

Does micro-revision.i end up empty after your test, or does it have the git version in it?

It contains two double quotes ("") because the extracted directory isn't a git directory.

Based on comment 1, we want that file to be distributed with the git revision in it.
So this is exactly what we don't want.

Somehow i missed that part of the comment, sorry. I'm still curious about the reasoning behind the existence of the file in the tarball though. Isn't the version number enough to track down the commit? Versions are tagged to a specific commit so the file will always match this commit. IMHO it doesn't add anything.

People that build Tor from the source code repository trigger the micro-revision rule so their builds will and should include the git revision and in those cases it's useful.

comment:9 Changed 3 years ago by teor

Milestone: Tor: 0.2.???Tor: 0.3.???

Milestone renamed

comment:10 Changed 2 years ago by nickm

Keywords: tor-03-unspecified-201612 added
Milestone: Tor: 0.3.???Tor: unspecified

Finally admitting that 0.3.??? was a euphemism for Tor: unspecified all along.

comment:11 Changed 2 years ago by nickm

Keywords: tor-03-unspecified-201612 removed

Remove an old triaging keyword.

comment:12 Changed 2 years ago by nickm

Resolution: wontfix
Status: needs_reviewclosed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.