De-tarballing

Sorry, I hadn’t realised that there are three links – two of them are to the same zip, the other is to a self-extracting archive. I can’t remember which one I used. I’ll have to collect both and try each.

Thanks. I can do the same – although you’ll probably beat me to it! If they’re different, presumably they’ll have different version numbers… or at least different timestamps.

s it just me who has found it impossible to UnTarBZ2 a source tarball recently? Has anyone else tried?

I downloaded the src-disc.5.17.tar.bz this morning and set it decompressing with UnTarBZ2. I’ve just logged on to the BB from work and it appears to have fully decompressed it. I had alignment exceptions off.

The RISC OS source code page really doesn’t show the MD5 hash of the files, does it? I’m not dreaming?

I’m not dreaming?

You’re not. That certainly looks like the time after the date!

OK… so how am I supposed to check that the MD5 hash of the archive is the same as that computed by ROOL and therefore that the tarball I’ve downloaded is correct?

Compare with (most of?) the other download pages, which seem to have an MD5 hash along with each file.

Wow. It’s a good job I was sitting down… I just noticed that UnTarBZ2 has completed!

That’s UnTarBZ2 as created from the self-extracting archive, working on the OMAP source tarball from this morning, with alignment exceptions off and the system heap set to its maximum value of 4080K (and why, for the benefit of my curiosity, is that not 4096K?)

I’ll have to try again with UnTarBZ2 from the zipped version. Anyway, now I’m in a position of strength. I have a fresh set of source files to work with!

I’ve e-mailed info@riscosopen.org to ask if the fact that only some files and archives have an MD5 hash is known. I’ve also set a version of UnTarBZ2, unzipped from the zipfile on the ROOL site, working on the same tarball. We’ll see if the result is any different.

And, yes, indeed, it is different… it cr@ps out a few minutes in.

So the versions of UnTarBZ2 from the self-extracting utility and the zip will probably turn out to be different. That’s a test for tomorrow.

I have a fresh set of source files to work with!

Beware that some components will fail (with newer sources than those you’ve extracted) due to the recent renaming of macros.

Compare with (most of?) the other download pages, which seem to have an MD5 hash along with each file.

Perhaps some pages don’t run/work properly with make-md5.rb.

[Edit: Or maybe it’s here instead.]

It might be worth logging a bug report (even if it just points here), so it’s recorded for easy reference.

So the versions of UnTarBZ2 from the self-extracting utility and the zip will probably turn out to be different. That’s a test for tomorrow.

I’m running the util UnTarBZ2 on this morning’s¹ ‘src-omap.5.17.tar.bz2’ now. Will follow that via the zip version on the same file (after a power-off).

¹ 2011-03-15 03:45:02

So the versions of UnTarBZ2 from the self-extracting utility and the zip will probably turn out to be different. That’s a test for tomorrow.

The extraction completed in both cases. Will have to check the contents later.

(and why, for the benefit of my curiosity, is that not 4096K?)

I think there is 16K of space for the SVC stack permanently allocated in the same dynamic area.

The extraction completed in both cases. Will have to check the contents later.

The contents certainly appear to be the same in each case, with files correctly filetyped and suffixes removed :-)

The process seems to be working for me now. I have a suggestion for possible inclusion in a future update to !UnTarBZ2:

• During the removal/erase phase after extraction, it could be helpful to give a visual indication that something is taking place, à la SDCreate. (I just saved a copy of the log file and dismounted the drive before noticing that “(Running)” instead of “(Completed)” was in the title bar, but apparently no harm done.)

I’ve e-mailed info@riscosopen.org to ask if the fact that only some files and archives have an MD5 hash is known.

Is the current arrangement a revision? (I didn’t take a screengrab.)

People should certainly be aware of this topic.