Re: Extra data in gnome-bluetooth tarballs

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 15:46 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
> Hello Bastien,
> 
> There is something strange going on in the gnome-bluetooth tarballs.
> Some of these tarballs have at least 12MB of additional data. Maybe the
> tarball was concatenated together or something.
> 
> Could you look into this?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> FYI, the errors:
> 
> Version: 2.31.90
>  - Checking tar.gz: ........, FAILED
> ERROR: Tarball has too much extra data (expected max 10.00K, found 12.0M)
>  - Checking tar.bz2: ........, FAILED
> ERROR: Tarball has too much extra data (expected max 10.00K, found 12.0M)
> Version: 2.91.91
>  - Checking tar.gz: .........., FAILED
> ERROR: Tarball has too much extra data (expected max 10.00K, found 13.2M)
>  - Checking tar.bz2: .........., FAILED
> ERROR: Tarball has too much extra data (expected max 10.00K, found 13.2M)
> Version: 2.91.92
>  - Checking tar.gz: .........., FAILED
> ERROR: Tarball has too much extra data (expected max 10.00K, found 13.3M)
>  - Checking tar.bz2: .........., FAILED
> ERROR: Tarball has too much extra data (expected max 10.00K, found 13.3M)

>From the file listings here:
http://ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/GNOME/sources/gnome-bluetooth/2.91/

It seems to have started with 2.91.91.

$ du -ms gnome-bluetooth-2.91.5 gnome-bluetooth-2.91.92
8	gnome-bluetooth-2.91.5
8	gnome-bluetooth-2.91.92
$ du -ms gnome-bluetooth-2.91.5.tar gnome-bluetooth-2.91.92.tar 
7	gnome-bluetooth-2.91.5.tar
20	gnome-bluetooth-2.91.92.tar

Huh. The only thing I could see in the newer builds was:
tar: gnome-bluetooth-2.91.92/docs/reference/libgnome-bluetooth/html/gnome-bluetooth-bluetooth-chooser.html: file name is too long (max 99); not dumped
tar: Exiting with failure status due to previous errors
gtar: gnome-bluetooth-2.91.92/docs/reference/libgnome-bluetooth/html/gnome-bluetooth-bluetooth-chooser.html: file name is too long (max 99); not dumped
gtar: Exiting with failure status due to previous errors

Generating a 2.91.5 with the same toolchain gives me the same small tar
file. After a git bisect showing that the problem was with:
commit b81fdf595e9dc1d791cb6ad469d1fce97653b6bf
Author: Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>
Date:   Tue Mar 8 08:38:20 2011 +0000

    2.91.91

I realised that the only difference to the code is the change in version
number that just tipped the balance from 99 to 100 characters. The good
news is that 3.0.0 won't have the bug.

Is this a problem in tar, or in the code calling it then?