727982 - Zip omni.ja and/or NSS *.chk files are different when compared with the installer's omni.ja and/or NSS *.chk files

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(Release Engineering :: General, defect, P2)

Description

[Brian Smith (:briansmith, :bsmith, use NEEDINFO?)]

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #727873 +++

(In reply to Brian Smith (:bsmith) from Bug #727873 comment #6)
> $ diff -r firefox-x64-profiling firefox-screwed
> Only in firefox-screwed: active-update.xml
> Only in firefox-screwed/uninstall: uninstall.update
> Only in firefox-screwed: updates
> Only in firefox-screwed: updates.xml
> Files firefox-x64-profiling/freebl3.chk and firefox-screwed/freebl3.chk
> differ
> Files firefox-x64-profiling/nssdbm3.chk and firefox-screwed/nssdbm3.chk
> differ
> Files firefox-x64-profiling/omni.ja and firefox-screwed/omni.ja differ
> Files firefox-x64-profiling/softokn3.chk and firefox-screwed/softokn3.chk
> differ
> 
> So, it seems like there may be some problem with the updater, since I expect
> that all four of the differing files to be the same.

I don't know how the updater works. I looked at a binary diff of omni.ja and I noticed that generally the contents seem identical, but in between huge gaps of identical content are a few differing bytes. I suspect that perhaps we are writing the current system time or something into omni.ja during the update, causing these trivial differences. If so, then we should probably stop doing that, in order to make diagnosing update problems easier.

The more serious problem is that the *.chk files don't match. The FIPS mode of Firefox might not work if the chk files aren't correct given the corresponding DLLs. I hypothesize that we decide what files go into the MAR file without considering the fact that the CHK files need to be regenerated if the corresponding DLLs changed.

Comment 1

[Brian Smith (:briansmith, :bsmith, use NEEDINFO?)]

By the way, the diff above is between the contents of the zip attached to bug 727873 and the 2012-02-15-Win64-profiling Nightly off of ftp.mozilla.org.

Comment 2

[Robert Strong (they/them - no direct email)]

Were you comparing the installer or the zip build?

Comment 3

[Brian Smith (:briansmith, :bsmith, use NEEDINFO?)]

(In reply to Brian Smith (:bsmith) from comment #1)
> By the way, the diff above is between the contents of the zip attached to
> bug 727873 and the 2012-02-15-Win64-profiling Nightly off of ftp.mozilla.org.

The zip build.

Comment 4

[Robert Strong (they/them - no direct email)]

I am fairly certain that is due to the way releng generates zip builds vs. installer builds (one reference is bug 404340). Moving over to releng for further investigation.

Comment 5

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

We generate MAR files out of the Windows Installers. Zips are staged differently. If they need to be exactly the same as the installer + mar, that's a Core: Build Config bug.

Comment 6

[Chris AtLee [:catlee]]

related to bug 732526 I wonder?

Comment 7

[Robert Strong (they/them - no direct email)]

(In reply to Chris AtLee [:catlee] from comment #6)
> related to bug 732526 I wonder?
Not at all. This has to do with the difference in zip files when compared to our installer files.

Comment 8

[Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)]

A bit confused by this bug, so please excuse if any of this is off target:

1, I looked at the latest win64 and win32 nightlies for m-c, and the omni.ja is consistent across the zip, complete update and installer. The check files are known to be different in zips, which is a limitation of the current packaging code. We chose to have installer and complete update the same, since that's what we ship to end users.

2, I looked at taras's app dir from bug 727873. The updates.xml files says the partial update to 20120215040235 succeeded, and the only differences I see between taras's dir and the installer of the same day 
 http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/2012/02/2012-02-15-04-02-35-profiling/firefox-13.0a1.en-US.win64-x86_64.installer.exe
unpacked with 7z were
$ diff -rq taras/ exe/core/
Only in taras/: active-update.xml
Only in exe/core/: jsloader
Only in taras/: p
Only in taras/uninstall: uninstall.update
Only in taras/: updates                    
Only in taras/: updates.xml

The 1st and 4th-6th are expected, the third appears to be a profile, and the 2nd is empty. No differences there between omni.ja or chk files.

Could you clarify what the problem is ?

Comment 9

[Chris AtLee [:catlee]]

haven't seen any more reports of this, so closing out.

please re-open if it re-occurs or if you have more information to add.